'•A#2p5~ 


JSASP 


DISSERTATIONS 

ON      THE 

ENGLISH   LANGUAGE  : 

WITH     NOTES, 

HISTORICAL    AND    CRITICAL, 

To  which  Is  added, 

BY  WAV  o*  APPENDIX "' 
AN       ESSAY        ON 

A 


REFORMED  MODE  OF  SPELLING, 

WITH 

v*.  FRANKLIN'S  ARGUMENTS  ON  THAT  SUBJECT, 
BY  NOAH  WEBSTER,  JUN.  ESQUIRE. 


•PRIMA    DISCENTltTM    EIBMENTA,    IN     Q.UIBUS    ET 
IPSIS    PARUM    EI.ABORATUR. 


PRINTED   AT   BOSTON,  FOR   THE  AUTHOR, 

BY  ISAIAH   THOMAS   AND   COMPANY, 

WDCCJLXXXIX, 


HIS    EXCELLENCE, 

rnilm,  tp&jf;  LL.  D.  F.R.S. 

LatePREsiDKNTof  the  COMMON  WEALTH  of  PENNSYLVANIA, 

The  following  DISSERTATIONS 

Are  mofl  refpe&fully  Infcribed, 
By  His  Excellency's 

Moil  obliged  and  moil  obedient  Servant, 


DEDICATIONS  are  dually 
dcfigned  to  flatter  the  Great,  to  acknow- 
lege  their  fervices,  or  court  their  favor 
and  influence.  But  very  different  mo 
tives  have  led  me  to  prefix  the  venerable 
name  of  FRANKLIN  to  this  publication. 

RESPECT  for  his  Excellency's  talents 
and  exertions,  as  a  great  Philofopher  and 
a  warm  Patriot,  I  feel  in  common  with 
all  the  lovers  of  fcience  and  freedom,  but 
my  peculiar  admiration  of  his  chara<5ler? 
arifes  from  confidering  it  as  great  in 

things. 

A  2  His 

6S4359 


iv  D   E    D    1   C    A    T    I    O    N. 

His  Excellency  has  not  labored  to 
perplex  himfelf  and  confound  his  coun 
trymen  with  ingenious  theories  in  ethics, 
and  unintelligible  fpeculations  in  theology 
and  metaphyfics.  He  has  not  compiled 
volumes  to  prove  or  difprove  the  proba 
bility  of  univerfal  falvation,  or  the  eternal 
duration  of  future  punifhments  $  content 
with  a  plain  doftrine,  taught  by  philofo- 
phy  and  common  fenfe,  and  confirmed  by 
chriftianity,  that  virtue  and  happinefs, 
vice  and  punifliment,  are  infeparably  con- 
ne&ed,  and  that  "  if  we  do  well  here,  we 
fhall  fare  well  hereafter."  In  the  moft 
elevated  Rations  of  life,  his  Excellency 
has  never  beer*  above  a  conftant  applica 
tion  to  fome  ufeful  bufinefs  j  thus  comply 
ing  with  that  precept  of  the  fourth  com 
mand,  "  fix  dqysjhalt  tfwu  labor  and -do  all 
thy  work"  which. is  as  pofitive  an  injunc 
tion,  and  as  binding  upon  all  men,  as  the 
fir  ft  article,  "  remember  the  Sabbath  Jay,  to 
it  holy™ 


DEDICATION.  V 

IN  his  philofophical  refearches,  he  has 
been  guided  by  experiment,  and  fought 
for  pratfical  truths.  Ih  the  world,  he  has 
been  induftrious  to  colleft  fafls,  (which 
compofe  all  our  knowlege)  and  apply 
them  to  the  moft  ufeful  purpofes  of  gov 
ernment,  agriculture,  commerce,  manu- 
fa&ures,  rural,  domeftic  ^nd  moral  econ 
omy.  In  communicating  his  ideas  he 
does  not  facrifice  truth  to  embelliftiment. 
His  ftile  is  plain  and  elegantly  neat  5  and 
his  remarks  are  not  fo  general  as  to  leave 
his  ideas  indefinite  and  obfcure.  His  pen 
follows  his  thoughts,  and  confequently 
leads  the  reader,  without  ftudy,  into  the 
fame  train  of  thinking.  In  (hort,  he  writes 
for  the  child  as  well  as  the  philofopher, 
and  always  writes  well,  becaufe  he  never 
takes  pains  to  write. 

VIOLENTLY  attached  to  no  political 
party,  he  labors  to  reconcile  contending 
fa6lions  in  government.  Convinced,  by 
the  experience  of  a  long  life,  that  all  men 
are  liable  to  err,  and  acknowleging  "  that 
he  has  often  found  himfelf  miftaken,  and 
A3  had 


Vi  DEDICATION. 

had  occafion  to  change  his  opinions/'  he 
Confentsto  meafures  which  his  judgement 
tells  him  are  theoretically  wrong,  when  the 
voices  of  a  majority  declare  them  to  be 

'praBlcally  right. 

HE  never  attempts  to  ufurp  the  divine 
prerogative  of  controling  opinions  5  never 
charges  another  with  ignorance,  knavery 
and  lolly,  nor  endeavors  to  ftab  his  repu 
tation.,  for  not  fubfcribing  a  particular 
creed  ;  much  lefs  does  he  ever  aflume  a 
dictatorial  authority,  and  fentence  to  final 
damnation,  thofe  who  have  the  fame 
chance  of  being  right  as  himfelf,  and 
whofe  conduft,  whatever  may  be  their 
opinions,  is  regulated  by  the  rules  of  mo 
ral  and  focial  virtue. 

FOR  thefe  reafons,  as  well  as  for  the  age, 
the  eminent  rank  and  public  merits  of  this 
illuftrious  defender  of  American  freedom, 
I  revere  a  charafter  equally  known  and  re- 
fpefted  in  this  and  foreign  countries. 

HARTFORD,  May,  1789, 

PREFACE, 


PREFACE. 


Y 


O  U  N  G  gentlemen  who  have  gone 
through  a  courfe  of  academical  ftudies,  and  received 
the  uiual  honors  of  a  Univerfity,  are  apt  to  contract  a 
fingular  ftiffnefs  in  their  convention.  They  read 
Lowth's  Introduction,  or  fome  other  grammatical  treat- 
ife,  believe  what  they  read,  without  examining  the 
grounds  of  the  writer's  opinion,  and  attempt  to  ihape 
their  language  by  his  rules.  Thus  they  enter  the  world 
with  fuch  phrafes  as,  amean^  averje  from,  if  be  have,  he 
has  gotten^  and  others  which  they  deem  correct  ;  they 
pride  themfelves,  for  fome  time,  in  their  fuperior  learn 
ing  and  peculiarities  ;  till  further  information,  or  the 
ridicule  of  the  public,  brings  them  to  ufe  the  language 
of  other  people. 

SUCH  has  been  my  progrefs,  and  that  of  many  of  my 
cotemporaries.  After  being  fome  years  in  that  excel 
lent  fchool,  the  world,  I  recommenced  my  ftudies,  en 
deavored,  not  merely  to  learn,  but  to  underfhmd,  the 
<?,  by  r,  of  the  Englifh  language,  and  in  1783  compiled 
and  publifhed  the  Firft  Part  of  my  Grammatical  Infti- 
tute.  *  The  favorable  reception  of  this,  prompted  me 
to  extend  my  original  plan,  which  led  to  a  further  in- 
veftigation  of  the  principles  of  language.  After  all  mv 
reading  and  obfervation  for  the  courfe  of  ten  years,  I 
have  been  able  to  unlearn  a  confiderable  part  of  what 
1  learnt  in  early  life  ;  and  at  thirty  years  of  age,  can, 
with  confidence,  affirm,  that  our  modern  grammars 
have  done  much  more  hurt  than  good.  The  authors 
have  labored  to,  prove,  what  is  obvioufly  abfurd,  viz. 
that  our  language  is  not  made  right  ;  and  in  purfuance 
of  this  idea,  hav.e  tried  to  make  it  over  again,  and  per- 
i'uade  the  Englifti  to  fpeak.  by  Latin  rules,  or  by  arbi 
trary  rules  of  their  own.  Hence  they  have  rejected 
.many  phrafes  of  pure  Englifli,  and  fubftituted  thofe 
which  are  neither  Englifh  nor  fenfe.  Writers  and 
Grammarians  have  attempted  for  centuries  -to  in 
troduce  a  fubjun&ive  mode  into  Englifh,  yet  without 

effect  ; 


Viii  PREFACE, 

efFecl:  ;  the  language  requires  none,  diftinft  from  the 
indicative  ;  and  therefore  a  fubjun&ive  form  ftands  in> 
books  only  as  a  fmgularity,  and  people  in  pra&iee  pay 
no  regard  to  it.  The  people  are  right,  and  a  critical 
inveftigation  of  the  fubjeft,  warrants  me  in  faying,  that 
coinmon  practice,  even  among  the  unlearned,  is  gener 
ally  defenfible  on  the  principles  of  analogy,  and  th$ 
ftrufture  of  the  language,  and  that  very  few  of  the  al 
terations  recommended  by  Lowth  and  his  followers, 
can  be  vindicated  on  any  better  principle  than  fome 
Latin  rule,  or  his  own  private  opinion. 

SOME  compilers  have  alfo  attempted  to  introduce  $ 
potential  mode,  where  they  arrange  thofe  phrafes  that 
have  the  auxiliary  verbs,  as  they  are  called,  can,  may,  &c» 
But  all  the  helping  verbs  are  principal  verbs,  and  the 
verb  following  them  i$  generally  in  the  infinitive.  / 
tan  go,  he  may  write,  we  Jball  fee,  &c.  are  only  a  cufto- 
mary  ellipfis  of  /  can  to  go,  be  may  to  write,  we  Jball  to 
fee  ;  and  are  no  mor.e  a  potential  mode  than  /  dare  go^ 
we  (aw  him  rife. 

IN  the  indeclinable  parts  of  fpeech,  all  authors  were 
iniftaken,  till  Mr.  Home  Tooke  explained  them  :  Our 
conjuc~tions  are  moftly  verbs  in  the  imperative  mode  : 
Our  adverbs  and  prepofitions  are  moftly  verbs,  nouns 
and  adjedives,  either  feparate  or  Combined  ;  and  the 
proper  definition  of  adverb  and  prepoiition,  is,  "  a  word, 
or  union  of  words,  without  the  ordinary  rules  of  gov 
ernment."  Becaufe  is  a  compound  of  the  verb  be^  in 
the  imperative,  and  the  noun  caufe  ;  otherwise  is  mere 
ly  a  corruption  of  other  ways  ;  wherefore  is  a  corruption 
of  the  Roman  qua-re^  with  the  addition  of  for ;  wifely  is, 
nothing  more  than  the  two  adjectives  wije  like.  80  that 
in  many  cafes,  the  want  of  a  ipace  between  two  words, 
or  of  the  ufuai  rules  of  government,  is  the  only  cireum- 
flance  that  diftinguifhes  them  from  ordinary  nouns  and 
verbs  j  that  is,  the  only  thing  that  makes  them  adverbs 
or  prepofitions  ;  fuch  as,  becauje^  always^  beyond,  before^  be-* 
bind,  forward,  backward.  In  (hort,  had  the  Engliill 
.never  been  acquainted  with  Greek  and  Latin,  they 

would 


P    R    £    £    A    C    E,  ifc 

would  never  have  thought  of  one  half  the  distinctions 
and  rules  which  make  up  our  Englifh  grammars. 


THE  object  of  grammar,  in  a  living  language,  is  usu 
ally  mifun.derftood.  Men  often  fuppofe  they  must 
Jearn  their  native  language  by  grammar  ;  whereas  they 
learn  the  language  first,  and  grammar  afterwards.  The 
principal  bufmeis  of  a  compiler  of  a  grammar  is,  to  fep- 
arate  local  or  partial  practice  from  the  general  cujlom  of 
fpeaking  ;  and  reject  what  is  local>  whether  it  exists  a- 
mong  the  great  or  the  fmall,  the  learned  or  ignorant, 
and  recommend  that  which  is  univerfaj,  or  general,  or 
which  conforms  to  the  analogies  of  structure  in  a  Ian-* 
guage.  Whether  the  words  means9  pains,  news,  ought 
*o  have  been  ufed  originally  in  the  fmgular  form  ;  or 
(heep,  deer^  bofe,  in  the  plural  \  or  in  other  words,  whether 
*he  language  is  well  made,  or  might  in  fome  instances 
"be  mended,  are  questions  of  little  confequence  now  j  it 
;»s  our  bufmefs  to  find  what  the  Englilh  language  w,  an4 
*iot,  how  it  might  have  been  made.  The  moft  difficult 
tafk  now  to  be  performed  by  the  advocates  of  pure  Eng- 
lijky  is  to  reftrain  the  influence  of  men,  learned  in  Greek 
and  Latin,  but  ignorant  of  their  own  tongue  ;  who  have 
laboured  to  reject  much  good  Englifh,  becaufe  they 
have  not  understood  the  original  construction  of  the 
language.  Should  the  following  Diflertations  produce 
this  effect,  in  the  fmalleft  degree,  they  may  render  ff- 
fential  fervice  to  our  native  tongue, 

THESE  Diflertations  derive  their  origin  from  accci- 
dental  circumstances,  the  hiitory  of  which  is  briefly  this* 
The  rieceffity  of  fecuring  the  copy  right  of  the  Gram 
matical  Institute  in  the  different  states,  feconded  by  a 
deiire  of  being  acquainted  with  my  own  country,  in 
duced  me  to  iufpend  my  profeffionul  purfuits,  and  vifit 
the  Southern  States.  While  I  was  waiting  for  the 
regular  Sefnons  of  the  Legislatures,  in  thofe  {tales 
which  had  not  pasTed  laws  for  protecting  literary  prop 
erty,  I  amufed  my  felt  in  writing  remarks  on  the  Eng- 
li/h  Language,  without  knowing  to  what  purpofe  they 
tvould  be  applied.  They  were  begun  in  Baltimore  i$ 

the 


r  PREFACE. 

the  fammer  of  1785  ;  and  at  the  perfuafion  of  a  friend, 
and  the  confent  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Allifon,  whofe  polite- 
nefs  deferves  my  grateful  acknowlegements,  they 
were  read  publicly  to  a  fmall  audience  in  the  Prefby- 
terian  Church.  They  were  afterward  read  in  about 
twenty  of  the  large  towns  between  Williamfburg  in 
Virginia,  and  Portfmouth  in  New  Hampshire.  Thefe 
public  readings  were  attended  with  various  fuccefs  ; 
the  audiences  were  generally  fmall,  but  always  refpect- 
able  ;  and  the  readings  were  probably  more  ufeful  to 
tnyfelf  than  to  my  hearers.  I  every  where  availed  my* 
felf  of  the  libraries  and  converfation  of  learned  men,  to 
correct  my  ideas,  and  collect  new  materials  for  a 
treatife,  which  is  now  prefented  to  the  public. 

THERE  are  few  men  who  do  not  at  times  find 
themfelves  at  a  lofs,  refpecting  the  true  pronunciation 
of  certain  words.  Having  no  principles  or  rules,  by 
which  they  can  folve  queftions  of  this  kind,  they  imi 
tate  fome  gentleman,  whofe  abilities  and  character  enti 
tle  his  opinions  to  refpect,  but  whofe  pronunciation 
may  be  altogether  accidental  or  capricious. 

WITH  refpect  to  many  words,  I  have  been  in  the 
fame  uncertainty  j  and  ufed  formerly  to  change  my 
pronunciation,  in  conformity  to  the  practice  of  ther 
laft  man  of  fuperior  learning  whom  1  heard  fpeak. 
My  enquiries  have  been  directed  to  inveftigate  fome 
principles,  which  will  remove  all  difficulties  in  pronun 
ciation  ;  the  refult  of  which  is  a  full  fatisfaction  in  my 
own  mind  as  to  almoft  every  particular  word.  Whether 
the  principles  will  prove  equally  fatisfactory  to  others, 
it  is  impoffible  now  to  determin.  Moft  of  the  varieties 
in  pronunciation  are  mentioned  in  the  fecond  and  third 
Diflertations  ;  thofe  which  are  not,  the  reader  will  be 
enabled  to  adjuft  on  the  principles  there  unfolded. 

IT  will  beobferved,  that  many  of  the  remarks  in  this 
publication  are  not  new.  This  will  be  no  objection  to 
the  main  delign  ;  as  fome  remarks  which  are  found  in 
other  philological  treatifes,  are  neceiTary  to  the  general 

plan 


r  K.    £    *'    A    C    E.  xi 

plan  of  this.  A  great  part  however  of  my  opi  ions  are 
new,  and  many  of  them  directly  oppofed  to  he  rules 
laid  down  by  former  writers. 

IN  the  fmgularityoffpelling  certain  words,  I  am  au 
thorized  by  Sidney,  Clarendon,  Middleton,  Blackftone, 
Aih,  or  other  eminent  writers,  whofe  authority,  being 
fupported  by  good  principles  and  convenience,  is  deem 
ed  fuperior  to  that  of  Johnfon,  whofe  pedantry  has  cor 
rupted  the  purity  of  our  language,  and  whofe  principles 
would  in  time  deftroy  all  agreement  between  the  fpell- 
ing  and  pronunciation  of  words.  I  once  believed  that 
a  reformation  of  our  othography  would  be  unneceflary 
and  impracticable.  This  opinion  was  hafty  5  being 
the  refult  of  a  flight  examination  of  the  fubject.  I  now 
believe  with  Dr.  Franklin  that  fuch  a  reformation  is 
practicable  and  highly  neceffary. 

IT  has  been  my  aim  to  fupport  my  opinions  by  nu 
merous  and  refpectable  authorities.  In  fome  cafes,  an 
author  is  quoted,  but  not  the  chapter  or  page.  This 
was  owing  to  neglect  in  firft  tranfcribing  paflages, 
which  was  often  done,  without  any  defign  to  ufe  the 
quotations  as  authorities  in  the  prefent  work  ;  and  the 
paflages  could  not  afterwards  be  found  without  great 
trouble,  and  fometimes  the  author  could  not  be  a  fec- 
ond  time  procured.  In  a  very  few  inftances,  a  quota 
tion  has  been  taken  at  fecond  hand  on  the  credit  of  a 
faithful  writer  j  but  never  when  I  could  obtain  the 
original  work.  Many  other  ancient  anthors  would 
have  been  confulted,  had  it  been  practicable  ;  but  the 
moft  valuable  of  thefe  are  very  fcarce,  and  many  of  them 
I  have  not  heard  of  in  America.  It  is  to  be  lamented 
that  old  authors  are  neglected,  and  modern  libraries 
compofed  of  abridgements,  compilations,  fhort  eflays, 
&c.  which  are  calculated  only  for  communicating  fome 
general  information  and  making  fuperfkial  fcholars,  to 
the  prejudice  of  profound  learning  and  true  fcience.* 

The 

* "  a  fungous  growth  of  Novels  and  pamphlets,  the  meaner  pro- 

dilutions  of  the  French  and  Engliih  preflesj  in  which  it  is  to  be  feared 
(the  reader)  rarely  finds  any  rational  pleasure,  and  more  rarely  ftill,  any 
lolid  improvement:,"——- -Hurris.  Hermes.  424. 


*H  PREFACE. 

The  American  ftudent  is  often  obliged,  and  too  often 
difpofed,  to  drink  at  the  ftreams,  inftead  of  mounting  to 
the  fources  of  information. 

FOR  the  remarks  on  Englifh  Verfe  in  the  fifth  Dif- 
fertation,  I  am  much  indebted  to  the  celebrated  author 
of  M'Fingal,  a  gentleman  who  has  "  drank  deep  of  the 
Pierian  Spring,"  and  who  is  equally  diftinguimed  for 
wit,  erudition,  correct  tafte,  and  profeflional  knowlege. 

^  IN  explaining  the  principles  of  the  language,  I  have 
aimed  at  perfpicuity,  with  a  view  to  render  the  work 
ufeful  to  all  claffes  of  readers.  The  Notes  at  the  end 
are  defigned  to  illuftrate  fome  points  by  authorities  or 
arguments  that  could  not  be  properly  arranged  in  the 
text ;  and  to  throw  fome  light  on  ancient  hiftory.  To 
the  curious  enquirer,  thefe  may  be  as  entertaining  as  the 
DhTertations  themfelves.  In  two  or  three  inftances,  I 
have  found  occafion  to  change  my  opinion,  fince  the 
publication  of  the  Inftitute  ;  but  a  future  edition  of  that 
work  will  be  conformed  to  the  criticifms  in  thefe  Dif* 
fertations. 

To  thofe  who  afk  where  a  writer  was  born  and  edu 
cated,  before  they  can  afcertain  the  value  of  his  writings, 
1  can  only  obferve,  it  is  expected  this  publication  will 
fare  like  all  others.  Men  every  where  fuppofe  that 
their  own  ftate  or  country  has  fome  excellence  that  does 
not  belong  to  their  neighbors  ;  and  it  is  well,  if  they 
do  not  arrogate  a  fuperiority  in  every  refpect.  Thry 
think  their  own  colleges  the  beft ;  their  profefftonal  men 
the  molt  learned,  and  their  citizens  the  moft  liberal  and 
polite.  I  have  been  witnefs  to  numberlefs  remarks  and 
infinuations  of  this  kind  in  almoft  every  ftate  .in  the 
union  ;  and  after  perfonal  obfervatipn,  can  affirm  that 
they  generally  proceed  from  grofs  ignorance,  or  unpar 
donable  prejudice.  But  it  is  very  natural  for  men  to 
think  and  fay  all  thefe  things  of  home,  when  they  have 
little  or  no  knowlege  of  any  thing  abroad* 

CONVINCED  that  a  writer  is  apt  to  overlook  his  own 
miftakes,  when  they  are  very  obvious  to  a  reader,  I  have 
Submitted  thefe  DiilertiUions  to  the  criticifm  of  good 

judges 


PREFACE, 


XUI 


judges  of  the  fubje&,  with  full  liberty  of  altering,  amend 
ing  and  expunging  any  part  of  the  work ;  by  which 
means  feveral  paflages  have  been  omitted  and  others 
corrected.  Still  there  may  be  faults  in  the  book  ;  and 
as  truth  is  the  objeft  of  nay  enquiries,  whenever  the 
friendly  critic  mall  point  out  any  errors,  either  in  fa£ 
or  opinion,  it  will  be  my  pride  and  pleafure  to  acknow- 
lege  and  correct  them.  Many  years  experience  has 
taught  me  that  the  public,  when  well  informed,  ufually 
form  a  very  juft  opinion  of  a  man  and  his  writings,  and 
I  am  perfectly  difpofed  to  acquiefce  in  their  decifion. 

P.  S.  SEVERAL  Eifays,  on  more  important  fubjecls, 
intended  for  an  Appendix  to  this  work,  are  necefiarily 
rcferved  for  a  future  volume. 


CONTENTS. 


C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S. 


DISSERTATION     I. 

I 

NTRODUCT1ON,  17 

Advantages  ot  national  imiiormitv  in  language,  19 

Tin*  Knglifli  language  the  patent  ol  the  American,  21 
Ablurdity  of  copying  the  change*  of  language  in 

v  -KM!  IM  itain,  £4 
The  only  good  principles  on  which  any  permanent 

imifoimity  can  be  cilablifhed,  17 

Eughfli  writers  who  arc  the  bell  models  of  flile,  31 

\ViiU-is  who  have  corrupted  itile,  32 

Hilloiy  of  the  F.ngliHi  Language,  40 

Of  the  ancient  Celtic,  41 

Of  the  Armoric,  48 

C)l  ilie  old  Irifh,  49 

Ol  the  Teutonic  or  Gothic,  53 

Ol  the  Norman  French,  50 

Ol  the  lan^ua^c  in  Chaucer's  tune,  y) 

Re-  in  arks,  61 

(  )!  the  Saxon  origin  of  the  Englifh  tongue,  61 
Of  (he  poverty  and  copioufucls  of  languages,  63-64 
Of  the  difference  in  the  French  and  Englifli  man 

ner  o!  f;  »eaking,  67 
Oi  the  irregular  ortliography  of  the  Englifli  language,  70 

DISSERTATION     II. 

•mcnts  of  the  language  unfolded,  8l 

Rules  ot  pronunciation,  oi 

Ot  accent,  95 
Diiterenccs  of  pronunciation  and  controverted  points 

examined,  103 
How  i  lie  manner  of  fpeaking  may  be  affefted  by  the 

laws  of  property,  &c.  *o6 

DISSERTATION     III. 

anation  of  controverted  points,  continued,  131 

Of  modern  corruptions  in  the  hnglifh  pronunciation,  146 

DISSERTATION     IW 

Remarks  OD  the  formation  of  language^  181 

A  iketch 


CONTENTS.  xv 

A  {ketch  of  Mr.  Home  Tooke's  new  and  ingenious       f^tt 

explanation  of  the  particles,  186 

Examination  of  particular  phrafes,  aoi 

Noun,  201 

Verb,  222 

Mode,  231 

Number  and  pcrfbn,  23  a 

Auxiliaries,  234 

Criticifms  on  the  ufe  of  what  is  called  the  future 

tenfe,  236 
i  .             On  the  ufe  of  what  is  called  the  Subjunc 

tive  Mode,  240 

Of  the  participial  noun,  279 

Particles,  234 

State  of  the  language  in  America,  287 

DISSERTATION     V. 

Of  the  conftru£tion  of  Engliih  vcrfe,  291 

Paufes,  299 

Expreffion,  305 
Of  reading  verfe, 


NOTES,  HISTORICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Etymological  reafons  for  fuppofmg  the  European 
languages  to  be  defceuded  from  one  common 
ftock,  3*3-35* 

Other  arguments,  35°-353 

The  affinity  between  the  ancient  Irifh  language 

and  the  Punic,  353 
Reafons  for  fuppofmg  the  Irifhto  be  derived  from 

the  Phenician  or  Hebrew,  354 
Specimen  and  ftate  of  the  Engiilh  Language  in  the 

reign  of  Richard  II.  357 

Strictures  on  the  ftile  of  Sir  William  Temple,  364 

-  of  Dr.  Robertfon,  365 

—  :  -  of  M  r.  G  ibbon,    '  36  7 

APPENDIX. 

An  Efiay  on  the  neceflity,  advantages  and  practica 

bility  of  reforming  the  mode  of  fpelling,  391 

Dr.  Franklin's  arguments  on  the  fubjcft,  408 

DIRECTIONS. 


DIRECTIONS. 

't  H  E  founds  of  the  vowels,  marked  or  referred  to  in 
the  fecond  and  third  Diflertations,  are  according  to  the 
Key  in  the  Firft  Part  of  the  Inftitute.  Thui  : 


Firft  found, 

a 
late, 

e 

feet. 

1                 0 

nightj    note, 

u 

tune, 

Iky, 

Second 

hat, 

let, 

tin, 

tun, 

glory, 

Third, 

law, 

fraud 

Fourth, 

alk, 

father, 

Fifth, 

not, 

what, 

Sixth, 

prove 

,  room, 

The  capitals,  included  in  brackets  [   ]  *n  &e  text; are 
references  to  the  Note*  at  \hc  end, 


DISSERTATIONS 


ft 


ON     "THE 


DISSERTATION   I. 

I.  Introduction. — II.  Hiftory  of  the  Englijb 
Language. — III.  Remarks. 


INTRODUCTION; 

REGULAR  ftudy  of  lan 
guage  has,  in  all  civilized 
countries,  formed  a  part  of 
a  liberal  education.  The 
Greeks,  Romans,  Italians 
and  French  fucceffively  im 
proved  their  native  tongues,  taught  them 
in  Academies  at  home,  and  rendered  them 
entertaining  and  ufeful  to  the  foreign  ftu- 
tlent. 

B  TH* 


18        DISSERTATION    1. 

THE  .Englifh  tongue,  tho  later  in  its 
progrefs  towards  perfection,  has  attained 
to,  a,  CQilMerable  degree  of  purity,  ftrength 
.aud-elegaftcej  and  been  employed,  by  an 
afiiive  and1  'icientific  nation,  to  record  al~ 
moil  all  the  events  and  difcoveries  of  an 
cient  and  modern  times. 

THIS  language  is  the  inheritance  which 
the  Americans  have  received  from  their 
Britifh  parents.  To  cultivate  and  adorn 
it,  is  a  taik  referved  for  men  who  fhall  un- 
deriland  the  connection  between  language 
and  logic,  and  form  an  adequate  icTba  of 
the  influence  which  a  uniformity  of  fpeech 
may  have  on  national  attachments. 

IT  will  be  readily  admitted  that  the 
pleafures  of  reading  and  converfing,  the 
advantage  of  accuracy  in  bufmefs,  the  ne- 
eeffity  of  clearnefs  and  precifion  in  com 
municating  ideas,  require  us  to  be  able  to 
fpeak  and  write  our  own  tongue  with  eafe 
and  correftnefs.  But  there  are  more  im 
portant  reafoijs,  why  the  language  of  this 
country  fhould  be  reduced  to  fuch  fixed 
principles,  as  may  give  its  pronunciation 
and  conftruftion  all  the  certainty  and  uni 
formity  which  any  living  tongue  is  capa 


ble  of  receiving. 


THE 


DISSERTATION    I.         19 


THE  United  States  were  fettled  by 

f  rants  from  different  parts  of  Europe. 
ut  their  descendants  moftly  fpeak  the 
feme  tongue  -,  and  the  intercourfe  among 
the  learned  of  the  different  States,  which 
the  revolution  has  begun,  and  an  Ameri 
can  Court  will  perpetuate,  muft  gradually 
deftroy  the  differences  of  diale6l  which  our 
anceftors  brought  from  their  native  coun 
tries.  This  approximation  of  dialefts  will 
be  certain  ;  but  without  the  operation  of 
other  caufes  than  an  intercourfe  at  Court, 
it  will  be  flow  and  partial.  The  body  of 
the  people,  governed  by  habit,  will  ftill 
retain  their  refpeftive  peculiarities  of 
fpeaking  ;  and  for  want  of  fchools  and 
proper  books,  fall  into  many  inaccuracies, 
which,  incorporating  with  the  language  of 
the  ftate  where  they  live,  may  impercepti* 
bly  corrupt  the  national  language.  Noth 
ing  but  the  eftablilhment  of  fchools  and 
fome  uniformity  in  the  ufe  of  books,  can 
annihilate  differences  in  fpeaking  and  pre- 
ferve  the  purity  of  the  American  tongue. 
A  famenefs  of  pronunciation  is  of  confid- 
erable  confequence  in  a  political  view  -y  for 
provincial  accents  are  difagreeable  to  ftran- 
gers  and  fometimes  .have  an  unhappy  ef- 
fe£t  upon  the  focial  affedlions.  All  men 
have  local  attachments,  which  lead  them 
B  2  to 


20        DISSERTATION.    I 

to  believe  their  own  practice  to  be  the  leaft 
exceptionable.  Pride  and  prejudice  incline 
men  to  treat  the  practice  of  their  neigh 
bors  with  fome  degree  of  contempt.  Thus 
fmall  differences  in  pronunciation  at  firft 
excite  ridicule — a  habit  of  laughing  at  the 
fingularities  of  ftrangers  is  followed  by  dif- 
reipecl — and  without  refpeft  friendship  is 
a  name,  and  focial  intercourfe  a  mere  cer 
emony. 

THESE  remarks  hold  equally  true,  with 
refpe<5t  to  individuals,  to  fmall  focieties  and 
to  large  communities.  Small  caufes,  fuch 
as  a  nick-name,  or  a  vulgar  tone  in  fpeak- 
ing,  have  a6tually  created  a  diiibcial  fpirit 
between  the  inhabitants  of  the  different 
ftates,  which  is  often  difcoverable  in  pri 
vate  bufinefs  and  public  deliberations. 
Our  political  harmony  is  therefore  con 
cerned  in  a  uniformity  of  language. 

As  an  independent  nation,  our  honor 
requires  us  to  have  a  fyftem  of  our  own, 
in  language  as  well  as  government.  Great 
Britain,  whofe  children  we  are,  and  whofe 
language  we  fpeak,  jfhould  no  longer  be 
cur  ftandard ;  for  the  tafte  of  her  writers  is 
already  corrupted,  and  her  language  on 
the  decline.  But  if  it  were  not  fo,  fhe  is 

at 


DISSERTATION    I.        21 

at  too  great  a  diftance  to  be  our  model, 
and  to  inftruft  us  in  the  principles  of  our 
own  tongue. 

IT  muft  be  confidered  further,  that  the 
Englifh  is  the  common  root  or  ftock  from 
which  our  national  language  will  be  de 
rived.  All  others  will  gradually  wafte  a- 
way — and  within  a  century  and  a  half. 
North  America  will  be  peopled  with  a 
hundred  millions  of  men,  all  fpeaking  the 
fame  language.  Place  this  idea  in  compar- 
ifon  with  the  prefent  and  poffible  future 
bounds  of  the  language  in  Europe — con- 
fider  the  Eaftern  Continent  as  inhabited 
by  nations,  whofe  knowlege  and  inter- 
courfe  are  embarrafled  by  differences  of 
language  ;  then  anticipate  the  period  when 
the  people  of  one  quarter  of  the  world, 
will  be  able  to  affociate  and  converfe  to 
gether  like  children  of  the  fame  family.* 
Compare  this  profpeft,  which  is  not  vifion- 
ary,  with  the  ftate  of  the  Englifh  language 
in  Europe,  almoft  confined  to  an  Ifland 
and  to  a  few  millions  of  people  5  then  let 

reafon 

*  EVE  N  fuppofing  that  a  number  of  republics,kingdoms  or 
empires,  fliould  within  a  century  arifeand  divide  this  vaft 
territory  ;  ftill  the  fubjefts  of  all  will  ibcak  the  fame  lan 
guage,  and  the  confequence  of  this  uniformity  will  be  an 
intimacy  of  locial  intercourfe  hitherto  unknown,  and  a 


boundlcfs  diffufion  of  knowlege. 


22        DISSERTATION    L 

reafon  and  reputation  decide,  how  far  A*i 
merica  fhould  be  dependent  on  a  tranfat- 
lantic  nation,  for  her  ftandard  and  im~ 
provements  in  language. 

LET  me  add,  that  whatever  predile6lion 
the  Americans  may  have  for  their  native 
European  tongues,  and  particularly  the 
Britiih  defendants  for  the  English,  yet 
feveral  circuraftances  render  a  future  fepa-^ 
ration  of  the  American  tongue  from  the 
Englifh,  neceffary  and  unavoidable.  The 
vicinity  of  the  European  nations,  with  the 
uninterrupted  communication  in  peace, 
and  the  changes  of  dominion  in  war,  are 
gradually  afiimilating  their  refpeclive  lan 
guages.  The  Englilh  with  others  is  fuf- 
fering  continual  alterations.  America, 
placed  at  a  diflance  from  thofe  nations, 
will  feel,  in  a  much  lefs  degree,  the  influ 
ence  of  the  affimilating  caufes  ;  at  the 
fame  time,  numerous  local  caufes,  fuch  as 
a  new  country,  new  aflbciations  of  people, 
new  combinations  of  ideas  in  arts  and  fci- 
ence,  and  fome  intercourfe  with  tribes 
wholly  unknown  in  Europe,  will  introduce 
new  words  into  the  American  tongue. 
Thefe  caufes  will  produce,  in  a  courie  of 
time,  a  language  in  North  America,  as  dif 
ferent  from  the  future  language  of  Eng 
land, 


DISSERTATION    I.        23 

?and,  as  the  modern  Dutch,  Danifh  and 
Swedifh  are  from  the  German,  or  from 
one  another  :  Like  remote  branches  of  a 
tree  fpringing  from  the  fame  ftock ;  or  rays 
of  light,  fhot  from  the  fame  center,  and 
diverging  from  each  other,  in  proportion 
to  their  diftance  from  the  point  of  fepa- 
ration. 

WHETHER  the  inhabitants  of  America 
can  be  brought  to  a  perfeft  uniformity  in 
the  pronunciation  of  words,  it  is  not  eafy  to 
predift  ;  but  it  is  certain  that  no  attempt 
of  the  kind  has  been  made,  and  an  experi 
ment,  begun  and  purfued  on  the  right 
principles,  is  the  only  way  to  decide  the 
queftion.  Schools  in  Great  Britain  have 
gone  far  towards  demolifhmg  local  dia- 
alefts — commerce  has  alfo  had  its  influ 
ence — and  in  America  thefe  caufes,  ope 
rating  more  generally,  muft  have  a  pro 
portional  effeft. 

IN  many  parts  of  America,  people  at 
prefent  attempt  to  copy  the  Engliih  phrafes 
and  pronunciation — an  attempt  that  is 
favored  by  their  habits,  their  prepoffei- 
lions  and  the  intercourfe  between  the  two 
countries.  This  attempt  has,  within  the 
period  of  a  few  years,  produced  a  multi 
tude 


i4        DISSERTATION    I. 

tude  of  changes  in  thefe  particulars,  ef* 
pecially  among  the  leading  claffes  of  peo 
ple.  Thefe  changes  make  a  difference  be 
tween  the  language  of  the  higher  and  com 
mon  ranks  $  and  indeed  between  the  fame 
ranks  in  different  ftates  ;  as  the  rage  for 
copying  the  Englifh,  does  not  prevail  e- 
qually  in  every  part  of  North  America. 

BUT  befides  the  reafons  already  affigned 
to  prove  this  imitation  abfurd,  there  is  a 
difficulty  attending  it,  which  will  defeat 
the  end  propofed  by  its  advocates  5  which 
is,  that  the  Englifh  themfelves  have  no 
ftandard  of  pronunciation,  nor  can  they 
ever  have  one  on  the  plan  they  propofe. 
The  Authors,  who  have  attempted  to  give 
us  a  ftandard,  make  the  praftice  of  the 
court  and  ftage  in  London  the  fole  criteri 
on  of  propriety  in  fpeaking.  An  attempt 
to  eftablifh  a  ftandard  on  this  foundation 
is  both  itnjujl  and  idle.  It  is  unjuft,  be- 
caufe  it  is  abridging  the  nation  of  its  rights; 
The  general  practice  of  a  nation  is  the  rule 
of  propriety,  and  this  praftice  fhould  at 
leaft  be  confulted  in  fo  important  a  matter, 
as  that  of  making  laws  for  fpeaking. 
While  all  men  are  upon  a  footing  and  nQ 
Angularities  are  accounted  vulgar  or  ridic 
ulous,  every  man  enjoys  perfeft  liberty. 

But 


DISSERTATION    I.        25 

But  when  a  particular  fet  of  men,  in  ex 
alted  ftations,  undertake  to  fay,  "  we  are 
the  ftandards  of  propriety  and  elegance, 
and  if  all  men  do  not  conform  to  our  prac 
tice,  they  fhali  be  accounted  vulgar  and 
ignorant,"  they  take  a  very  great  liberty 
with  the  rules  of  the  language  and  the 
rights  of  civility. 

BUT  an  attempt  to  fix  a  ftandard  on  the 
praftice  of  any  particular  clafs  of  people  is 
highly  abfurd  :  As  a  friend  of  mine  once 
obferved,  it  is  like  fixing  a  light  houfe  on 
a  floating  ifland.  It  is  an  attempt  to^#v 
that  which  is  in  itfelf  variable  ;  at  leaft  it 
muft  be  variable  fo  long  as  it  is  fuppofed 
that  a  local  practice  has  no  ftandard  but  a 
local  practice  -y  that  is,  no  ftandard  but  it 
felf.  While  this  dodtrine  is  believed,  it 
will  be  impoffible  for  a  nation  to  follow  as 
faft  as  the  ftandard  changes — for  if  the 
gentlemen  at  court  conftitute  a  ftandard* 
they  are  above  it  themfelves,  and  their 
praftice  muft  fhift  with  their  paflions  ani 
their  whims. 

BUT  this  is  not  all.  If  the  praftice  of  a 
few  men  in  the  capital  is  to  be  the  ftand 
ard,  a  knowlege  of  this  muft  be  commu 
nicated  to  the  whole  nation.  Who  fliall 

do 


fcS        DISSERTATION    L 

do  this  ?  An  able  compiler  perhaps  at 
tempts  to  give  this  praftice  in  a  diftiona- 
ry  ;  but  it  is  probable  that  the  pronunci 
ation,  even  at  court,  or  on  the  ftage,  is  not 
uniform.  The  compiler  therefore  muft 
follow  his  particular  friends  and  patrons  ; 
in  which  cafe  he  is  fure  to  be  oppofed  and 
the  authority  of  his  ftandard  called  in 
queftion  ;  or  he  muft  give  two  pronunci 
ations  as  the  ftandard,  which  leaves  the 
ftudent  in  the  fame  uncertainty  as  it  found 
him.  Both  thefe  events  have  actually  tak 
en  place  in  England,  with  refpeft  to  the 
moft  approved  ftandards  ;  and  of  courfe 
no  one  is  univerially  followed. 

BESIDES,  if  language  muft  vary,  like 
fafhions,  at  the  caprice  of  a  court,  we  muft 
have  our  ftandard  diftionaries  republifhed, 
with  the  fafhionable  pronunciation,  .at  leaft 
once  in  five  years  ;  otherwife  a  gentleman 
in  the  country  will  become  intolerably  vul 
gar,  by  not  being  in  a  fituation  to  adopt 
the  fafhion  of  the  day.  The  new  editions 
of  them  will  fuperfede  the  old,  and  we  fhall 
have  our  pronunciation  to  re-learn,  with 
the  polite  alterations,  which  are  generally 
corruptions. 

SUCH  are  the  confequences  of  attempt 
ing  to  make  a  local  practice  titftjl&ndard  of 

language 


DISSERTATION    I.        27 

language  in  a  nation.  The  attempt  muft 
keep  the  language  in  perpetual  fluctuation, 
and  the  learner  in  uncertainty. 

IF  a  ftandard  therefore  cannot  be  fixed 
on  local  and  variable  cuftom,  on  what  fhall 
it  be  fixed  ?  If  the  moft  eminent  fpeakers 
are  not  to  direft  our  praftice,  where  fhall 
we  look  for  a  guide  ?  The  anfwer  is  ex 
tremely  eafy  ;  the  rules  of  the  language  it- 
felfy  and  the  general  practice  of  the  nation^ 
conftitute  propriety  in  fpeaking.  If  we 
examine  the  ftrafture  of  any  language, 
we  fliall  find  a  certain  principle  of  analogy 
running  through  the  whole.  We  fhall  find 
in  Englifh  that  fimilar  combinations  of 
letters  have  ufually  the  fame  pronuncia 
tion  j  and  that  words,  having  the  fame  ter 
minating  fyllable,  generally  have  the  accent 
at  the  fame  diftance  from  that  termination. 
Thefe  principles  of  analogy  were  not  the 
refult  of  defign— they  muft  have  been  the 
effeft  of  accident,  or  that  tendency  which 
a]l  men  feel  towards  uniformity.*  But 

the 

*  THIS  difpofition  is  taken  notice  of  by  Dr.  Blair,  Left.  8. 
Where  he  obferves,  "thattho  the  formation  of  abftra&  or 
general  conceptions  is  fuppofed  to  be  a  difficult  operation 
of  the  mind,  yet  fuch  conceptions  muft  h,ave  entered  into 
the  firft  formation  of  languages" — "  this  invention  of  ab- 
terms  requires  no  great  exertion  of  metaphyfical  ca^ 

pacity'*-*- 


28        DISSERTATION    L 

the  principles,  when  eftablifhed,  are  pro- 
duftive  of  great  convenience,  and  become 
an  authority  fuperior  to  the  arbitrary  deci- 
iions  of  any  man  or  clafs  of  men.  There 
is  one  exception  only  to  this  remark :  When 
a  deviation  from  analogy  has  become  the 
univerfal  praftice  of  a  nation,  it  then  takes 
place  of  all  rules  and  becomes  the  ftandard 
of  propriety. 

THE  two  points  therefore,  which  I  con 
ceive  to  be  the  bafis  of  a  ftandard  in  fpeak- 
ing,  are  thefe;  tmiverfalundifputed  practice, 
and  the  principle  of  analogy.  Univerfal 
practice  is  generally,  perhaps  always,  a 
rule  of  propriety  $  and  in  difputed  points, 
where  people  differ  in  opinion  and  prac 
tice,  analogy  fhould  always  decide  the  con- 
troverfy. 

THESE  are  authorities  to  which  all  men 
will  fabmit — they  are  fuperior  to  the  o- 

pinions 

pacity" — «  Men  are  naturally  inclined  to  call  all  thofe  ob- 
jefts  which  refemble  each  other  by  one  common  name — 
\Ve  may  daily  obferve  this  praftifed  by  children,  in  their 
firft  attempts  towards  acquiring  language." 

I  CANNOT,  with  this  great  critic,  call  the  procefs  by  which 
Jimilar  obje£ts  acquire  the  fame  name,  an  aft  of  abjlraElio-U) 
or  the  name  an  abftraEl  term.  Logical  diftin&ions  may  lead 
us  aft  ray.  There  is  in  the  mind  an  inftinttive  difpofition^  or 
principle  of  affodation,  which  will  account  for  all  common 
names  and  the  analogies  in  language. 


DISSERTATION    L        29 

pinions  and  caprices  of  the  great,  and  to 
the  negligence  and  ignorance  of  the  mul 
titude.  The  authority  of  individuals  is 
always  liable  to  be  called  in  queftion — but 
the  unanimous  confent  of  a  nation,  and  a 
fixed  principle  interwoven  with  the  very 
conftruftion  of  a  language,  coeval  and  co- 
extenfive  with  it,  are  like  the  common  laws 
of  a  land,  or  the  immutable  rules  of  mo 
rality,  the  propriety  of  which  every  man, 
however  refraftory,  is  forced  to  acknowl- 
ege,  and  to  which  moft  men  will  readily 
fubmit.  Fafliion  is  ufually  the  child  of 
caprice  and  the  being  of  a  day ;  principles 
of  propriety  are  founded  in  the  very  nature 
of  things,  and  remain  unmoved  and  un 
changed,  amidft  all  the  fluctuations  of  hu 
man  affairs  and  the  revolutions  of  time. 

IT  mult  be  confefied  that  languages  are 
changing,  from  age  to  age,  in  proportion 
to  improvements  in  fcience.  Words,  as 
Horace  obferves,  are  like  leaves  of  trees  ; 
the  old  ones  are  dropping  off  and  new  ones 
growing.  Thefe  changes  are  the  neceflary 
confequence  of  changes  in  cuftoms,  the  in 
troduction  of  new  arts,  and  new  ideas  in 
the  fciences.  Still  the  body  of  a  language 
and  its  general  rules  remain  for  ages  the 
fame,  and  the  new  words  ufually  conform 

to 


jo        DISSERTATION    L 

to  thefe  rules  ;  otherwife  they  ftand  as  ex 
ceptions,  which  are  not  to  overthrow  the 
principle  of  analogy  already  eftablifhed. 


when  a  language  has  arrived  at  a 
certain  ftage  of  improvement,  it  muft  be 
ftationary  or  become  retrograde  ;  for  im 
provements  in  fcience  either  ceafe,  or  be 
come  flow  and  too  inconfiderable  to  affeft 
materially  the  tone  of  a  language.  This 
ftage  of  improvement  is  the  period  when  a 
nation  abounds  with  writers  of  the  firft 
clafs,  both  for  abilities  and  tafte.  This 
period  in  England  commenced  with  the 
age  of  Queen  Elizabeth  and  ended  with 
the  reign  of  George  II.  It  would  have 
been  fortunate  for  the  language,  had  the 
ftile  of  writing  and  the  pronunciation  of 
words  been  fixed,  as  they  ftood  in  the  reign 
of  Queen  Ann  and  her  fucceffor.  Few 
improvements  have  been  made  fmce  that 
time  5  but  innumerable  corruptions  in 
pronunciation  have  been  introduced  by 
Garrick,  and  in  ftile,  by  Johnfon,  Gibbon 
and  their  imitators.*  THE 

*THE  progrefs  of  corruption  in  language  isdefcribed  with 
precifion,  and  philofophical  reafons  afiigned  with  great 
judgement,  by  that  celebrated  French  writer,  CondillaCj  in  .his 
Origin  of  Human  Knowledge.  Part  2. 

"  IT  is  nearly  the  fame  here  as  in  phyfics,  where  motion, 
the  fource  of  life,  becomes  the  principle  of  deitruftion, 

When 


DISSERTATION    I.        31' 

THE  great  Sidney  wrote  in  a  pure  ftile  5 
yet  the  beft  models  of  purity  and  elegance, 
are  the  works  of  Sir  William  Temple,  Dr. 

Middleton, 


When  a  language  abounds  with  original  writers  in  every 
kind,  the  more  a  perfon  is  endowed  with  abilities,  the  more 
difficult  he  thinks  it  will  be  to  furpafs  them.  A  mere  e- 
quality  would  not  fatisfyhis  ambition  ;  like  them  he  wants 
the  pre-eminence.  He  therefore  tries  a  new  road.  But 
as  every  ilile  analagous  to  the  chara&er  of  the  language 
and  to  his  own,  has  been  already  ufed  by  preceding  writers, 
he  has  nothing  left  but  to  deviate  from  analogy.  Thus  in 
order  to  be  an  original,  he  is  obliged  to  contribute  to  the 
ruin  of  a  language,  which,  a  century  fooner,  he  would  have 
helped  to  improve. 

"  THO  fuch  writers  may  be  criticized,  their  fuperior 
abilities  muft  ftill  command  fuccefs.  The  eafe  theie  is  in 
copying  their  defe6ts?  foon  perfuades  men  of  indifferent  ca 
pacities,  that  they  fhall  acquire  the  fame  degree  of  reputa 
tion.  Then  begins  the  reign  of  drained  and  fubtle  con 
ceits,  of  affe&ed  antithefes,  of  fpecious  paradoxes,  of  frivo 
lous  and  far-fetched  expreflions,  of  new-fangled  words, 
and  in  fhort,  of  the  jargon  of  perfons,  whofe  underftand- 
ings  have  been  debauched  by  bad  metaphyfics.  The  pub 
lic  applauds  ;  foolifh  and  ridiculous  writings,  the  beings  of 
a  day,  are  furprifingly  multiplied  ;  a  vicious  tafle  infefts  the 
arts  and  fciences,  which  is  followed  by  a  vifible  decreafe 
of  men  of  abilities." 

ONE  would  think  that  Condillac  had  defigned  here  to  give 
a  defcription  of  the.  prefent  tafte  of  the  Englifli  writers,  and 
a  flate  of  their  literature. 

THE  foregoing  fentiments  feem  to  have  been  borrowed 
from  Velleius  Paterculus.  Hift.  Rom.  L.  i.  Cap.  17. 

THE  famepailage  is  copied  by  Sig. Carlo  Denina,  Profeflbr 

ef  Eloquence  and  Belles  Lettres  in  the  Univeifity  of  Turin,. 

in 


3*       DISSERTATION    L 

Middleton,  Lord  Bolingbroke,  Mr.  Addi- 
fon  and  Dean  Swift.  But  a  little  inferior 
to  thefe,  are  the  writings  of  Mr.  Pope,  Sir 
Richard  Steele,  Dr.  Arbuthnot,  with  fome 
of  their  cotemporaries .  Sir  William  Black-* 
ftone  has  given  the  law  ftile  all  the  ele 
gance  and  precifion  of  which  it  is  capable. 
Dr.  Price  and  Dr.  Prieftley  write  with  pu 
rity,  and  Sir  William  Jones  feems  to  have 
copied  the  eafe,  fimplicity  and  elegance  of 
Middleton  and  Addifon. 

BUT  how  few  of  the  modern  writers 
have  purfued  the  fame  manner  of  writing  ? 
Johnfon's  ftile  is  a  mixture  of  Latin  and 
Englifh  ;  an  intolerable  compofition  of 
Latinity,  affefted  fmoothnefs,  fcholaftic  ac 
curacy  and  roundnefs  of  periods .  The  ben* 
efits  derived  from  his  morality  and  his  eru 
dition,  will  hardly  counterbalance  the  mi£- 
chief  done  by  his  manner  of  writing.  The 
names  of  a  Robertfon,  a  Hume,  a  Kome 
and  a  Blair,  almoft  filence  criticifm  ;  but 
I  muft  repeat  what  a  very  learned  Scotch 
gentleman  once  acknowleged  to  me, 

"  that 

in  his  "  Revolutions  of  Literature,"  page  47  ;  and  if  I  mif- 
take  not,  the  fentiments  are  adopted  by  Lord  Kaims,  in  his 
Sketches  of  the  Hiftory  of  Man. 

SIMILAR  reafons  maybe  afligned  for  the  prevalence  of  an 

affe&ed  and  vitious  pronunciation. 


DISSERTATION    I.        33 

t4  that  the  Scotch  writers  are  not  models  of 
the  pure  Englifti  ftile."  Their  ftile  is 
generally  ftiff,  fometimes  very  awkward, 
and  not  always  correft.*  Robertfon  la 
bors  his  ftile  and  fometimes  introduces  a 
word  merely  for  the  fake  of  rounding  a 
period.  Hume  has  borrowed  French  id 
ioms  without  number;  in  other  refpefts 
he  has  given  an  excellent  model  of  hiftori- 
cal  ftile.  Lord  Kaims'  manner  is  ftiff; 
and  Dr  Blair,  whofe  ftile  is  lefs  exception 
able  in  thefe  particulars,  has  however  in 
troduced,  into  his  writings,  feveral  foreign 
idioms  and  ungrammatical  phrafes.  The 
Scotch  writers  now  ftand  almoft  the  firft 
for  erudition ;  but  perhaps  no  man  can. 
write  a  foreign  language  with  genuin  pu 
rity. 

GIBBON'S  harmony  of  profe  is  calculated 
to  delight  our  ears ;  but  it  is  difficult  to 
comprehend  his  meaning  and  the  chain  of 

his. 

*  DR.  Withe rfpoon  is  an  exception.  His  ftile  is  eafy, 
fimple  and  elegant.  I  conlider  Dr.  Franklin  and  Dr« 
Witherfpoon  as  the  two  bed  writers  in  America.  The 
words  they  ufe,  and  their  arrangement,  appear  to  flow  fpon- 
taneoufly  from  their  manner  of  thinking.  The  vaft  fuperi- 
ority  of  their  flilesover  thofe  of  Gibbon  and  Gilliesy.  is  o\v-» 
ing  to  this  circumftance,  that  the  two  American  writers 
have  beftowed  their  labor  upon  ideas,  And  the  Engl-fh  hif- 
upon  tvcrds, 

c 


34        DISSERTATION    I. 

his  ideas,  as  faft  as  we  naturally  read  ;  and 
almoft  impoffible  to  recolleft  them,  at  any 
fubfequent  period.  Perfpicuity,  the  firft 
requifite  in  ftile,  is  fometimes  facrificed  to 
melody  ;  the  mind  of  a  reader  is  conftantly 
dazzled' by  a  glare  of  ornament,  or  charmed 
from  the  fubjeft  by  the  mufic  of  the  lan 
guage.  As  he  is  one  of  the^Sr/?,  it  is  hop 
ed  he  may  be  the  lajl^  to  attempt  the  grati 
fication  of  our  ears,  at  the  expenfe  of  our 
under/landing. 

SUCH  however  is  the  tafte  of  the  age  ; 
fimplicity  of  ftile  is  neglefted  for  orna 
ment,  and  fenfe  is  facrificed  to  found.* 

ALTHO 

*THE  fame  tafte  prevailed  in  Rome,  under  the  Empe 
rors,  when  genius  was  proftituted  to  the  mean  purposes  of 
flattery.  "It  muft  be  acknowleged  indeed,  that  after  the 
diffolutionof  the  Roman  republic,  this  art  began  to  be  pervert 
ed  by  being  too  much  admired.  Men  grew  exceflively  fond  of 
the  numerous  ftile,  and  readily  facrificed  the  ftrength  and 
energy  of  their  diicourfe  to  the  harmony  of  their  language, 
Pliny  the  younger  often  complains  of  this  contemptible  af- 
feftation  :  And  Quintilian  f peaks  of  certain  profe  writers 
in  his  time,  who  boafted  that  their  compofitions  were  fo 
ilriclly  numerous,  that  their  hearers  might  even  beat  time  to 
their  meafures.  And  it  fhould  leem  that  even  in  Tully's 
time,  this  matter  was  carried  to  excefs  ;  fince  even  then  the 
orators  dealt  fo  much  in  numbers,  that  it  was  made  a  quef- 
tion,  wherein  they  differed  from  the  Poets."—. — Mafon's 
Effay  on  the  Power  and  Harmony  of  Prolaic  Numbers* 
Introduction,  page  4. 

THIS  was  an  abufe  of  the  art.  Melody  fhould  be  fludi- 
cd  ;  but  not  principally. 


DISSERTATION    I.        35 

ALTHO  ftile,  or  the  choice  of  words 
and  manner  of  arranging  them,  may  be 
neceffarily  liable  to  change,  yet  it  does  not 
follow  that  pronunciation  and  orthography 
cannot  be  rendered  in  a  great  meafure  per 
manent.  An  orthography,  in  which  there 
would  be  a  perfe6t  correfpondence  between 
the  fpelling  and  pronunciation,  would  go 
very  far  towards  effecting  this  defireable 
objecl.  The  Greek  language  fuffered  littl£ 
or  no  change  in  thefe  particulars,  for  about 
a  thoufand  years  >  and  the  Roman  was  in 
a  great  degree  fixed  for  feveral  centuries. 

RAPID  changes  of  language  proceed  from 
violent  caufes  ;  but  thefe  Caufes  cannot  be 
fuppofed  to  exift  in  North  America.  It  is 
contrary  to  all  rational  calculation,  that  the 
United  States  will  ever  be  conquered  by 
any  one  nation,  fpeaking  a  different  lan 
guage  from  that  of  the  country.  Remov 
ed  from  the  danger  of  corruption  by  con- 
queft,  our  language  can  change  only  with 
the  How  operation  of  the  caufes  before- 
mentioned  and  the  progrefs  of  arts  and 
fciences,  unlefs  the  folly  of  imitating  our 
parent  country  fhould  continue  to  govern. 
us,  and  lead  us  into  endlefs  innovation. 
This  folly  however  will  lofe  its  influence 
gradually,  as  our  particular  habits  of  re- 
C  2  fpeft 


36        DISSERTATION    I. 

fpeft  for  that  country  fhall  wear  away,  and 
our  amor  patria  acquire  ftrength  and  in- 
fpire  us  with  a  fuitable  refpeft  for  our  own 
national  character. 

WE  have  therefore  the  faireft  opportu 
nity  of  eftablifhing  a  national  language, 
and  of  giving  it  uniformity  and  perfpicui- 
ty,  in  North  America,  that  ever  presented 
itfelf  to  mankind.  Now  is  the  time  to  be 
gin  the  plan.  The  minds  of  the  Ameri 
cans  are  roufed  by  the  events  of  a  revolu 
tion  ;  the  neceffity  of  organizing  the  polit 
ical  body  and  of  forming  conftitutions  of 
government  that  fhall  fecure  freedom  and 
property,  has  called  all  the  faculties  of  the 
mind  into  exertion;  and  the  danger  of 
lofing  the  benefits  of  independence,  has 
difpofed  every  man  to  embrace  any  fcheme 
that  fhall  tend,  in  its  future  operation,  to 
reconcile  the  people  of  America  to  each 
other,  and  weaken  the  prejudices  which 
oppofe  a  cordial  union. 

MY  defign,in  thefe  differtations,is  critical 
ly  to  inveftigate  the  rules  of  pronunciation 
jtn  our  language  >  to  examin  the  paft  and 
prefent  practice  of  the  Englifh,  both  in  the 
pronunciation  of  words  and  conftru6lion 
of  fentences ;  to  exhibit  the  principal  dif 
ferences 


DISSERTATION     I.         37 

ferences  between  the  praftice  in  England 
and  America,  and  the  differences  in  the 
feveral  parts  of  America,  with  a  view  to 
reconcile  them  on  the  principles  of  univer- 
falprattice  and  analogy.  I  have  no  fyftem 
of  my  own  to  offer  ;  my  fole  defign  is  to 
explain  what  I  fuppofe  to  be  authorities, 
fuperior  to  all  private  opinions,  and  to  ex- 
amin  local  dialecls  by  thofe  authorities. 

MOST  writers  upon  this  fubjeft  have 
fplit  upon  one  rock  :  They  lay  down  cer 
tain  rules,  arbitrary  perhaps  or  drawn  from 
the  principles  of  other  languages,  and  then 
condemn  all  Englifh  phraies  which  do  not 
coincide  with  thofe  rules.  They  feem  not 
to  confider  that  grammar  is  formed  on 
language,  and  not  language  on  grammar. 
Inftead  of  examining  to  find  what  the  Eng 
lifh  language  is,  they  endeavor  to  fhow 
what  it  ought  to  be  according  to  their  rules. 
It  is  for  this  reafon  that  fome  of  the  criti- 
cifms  of  the  moft  celebrated  philologers 
are  fo  far  from  being  juft,  that  they  tend 
to  overthrow  the  rules,  and  corrupt  the  true 
idiom,  of  the  Englifh  tongue.  Several  ex 
amples  of  this  will  appear  in  the  courfe  of 
•thefe  DhTertations. 

To  learn  the  Englifh  language  in  its  pu 
rity,  it  is  necefiary  to  examin  and  com- 
C  3  pare 


38        DISSERTATION    I. 

pare  the  beft  authors  from  Chaucer  to  the 
prefent  time.  In  executing  the  following 
work,  the  moft  approved  compilations 
have  been  confulted,  and  the  opinions  of 
the  learned  authors  confidered  as  refpeft- 
able,  not  as  decifive,  authorities.  The  lan 
guage  itfelf  has  been  examined  with  great 
induihy,  with  a  view  to  difcover  and  de 
fend  its  principles  on  the  beft  grounds, 
analogies  in  ftruffure^  and  immemorial  uf age. 
I  have  had  recourfe  to  the  works  of  au 
thors  who  wrote  prior  to  Chaucer,  and 
have  even  borrowed  fome  light  upon  this 
fubjeft,  from  the  early  ages  of  Gothic  ig 
norance.  Believing,  with  the  author  of 
"  Diverfions  of  Purley,"  that  the  peculiar 
ftrufture  of  our  language  is  Saxon,  and 
that  its  principles  can  be  difcovered  only 
in  its  Teutonic  original,  it  has  been  my 
bufinefs,  as  far  as  the  materials  in  my 
pofleflion  would  permit,  to  compare  the 
Englifh.  with  the  other  branches  of  the 
fame  ftock,  particularly  the  German  and 
the  Danifh.  Thefe  refearches  have  thrown 
light  upon  the  meaning  and  conftruftion 
pf  particular  phrafes,  and  enabled  me  to 
vindicate  fome  expreffions  in  the  language 
which  are  often  ufed,  but  generally  con- 
by  grammarians. 

MY 


DISSERTATION    L        39 

MY  knowlege  of  the  praftice  of  fpeak- 
ing  in  different  parts  of  America,  is  deriv 
ed  from  perfonal  obfervation.  My  knowl 
ege  of  the  paft  and  prefent  ftate  of  the  lan 
guage  in  England,  is  taken  from  the  writ 
ers  who  have  treated  exprefsly  of  the  fub- 
jeft.*  The  authorities  neceflary  to  prove 
particular  points  will  be  quoted,  as  occalion 
ihall  require. 

THE  tafkof  examining  words  cannot  be 
agreeable  to  a  writer,  nor  can  his  criticifms 
be  very  entertaining  to  the  reader.  Yet 
this  tafk  I  have  impofed  upon  myfelf ;  for 
I  believe  it  the  only  method  to  correft 
common  miftakes.  A  general  rule  may 
be  fufficient  for  a  claffical  fcholar,  who 
makes  it  his  bufinefs  to  apply  the  rule  to 
all  cafes  :  But  moft  readers  muft  have  their 
particular  errors  laid  before  their  eyes,  or 
they  will  not  difcover  them. 

To  offer  to  correft  the  miftakes  of  others, 
is  alfo  a  hazardous  tafk,  and  commonly  ex- 
pofes  a  man  to  abufe  and  ill  will.  To  avoid 
this  I  can  only  fay,  that  my  motives  for  the 
undertaking  were  not  local  nor  perfonal  -,  my 
enquiries  are  for  truth,  and  my  criticifms, 
it  is  hoped,  will  be  marked  with  candor. 

BUT 

*  WALL  is,  Johnfon,  Kenrick,  Stieridarij  with  a  multitude 
of  inferior  compilers. 


40        DISSERTATION    I. 

BUT  before  I  proceed  to  explain  the 
principles  of  pronunciation,  it  is  neceffary 
to  give  a  fketch  of  the  hiftory  of  our  lan 
guage  from  the  earlieft  times,  and  endeavor 
to  difcover  from  what  fources  it  is  derived. 


HISTORY  of  the  ENGLISH 

LANGUAGE. 

THE  firft  correct  accounts  we  have  of 
Britain  were  given  by  Julius  Cefar,  who  in 
vaded  and  conquered  the  fouthern  parts  of 
the  ifland,  about  fifty  four  years  before  the 
Chriftian  era.*  Tacitus,  in  his  Life  of 
Julius  j4gricola,  has  defcribed  the  natives 
of  the  ifland,  and  given  it  as  his  opinion, 
that  they  came  from  Gaul  (now  France.) 
The  inhabitants  of  Caledonia,  now  Scot 
land,  in  the  color  qf  their  hair  and  fize  of 
their  limbs,  refembled  the  Germans.  Some 
appearances  in  the  people  of  the  more 

fouthern 

*  HE  found  the  inhabitants  of  the  maritime  towns  fome- 
v/hat  civilized,*  and  in  their  manners  refembling  the  Gauls, 
with  whom  they  had  fome  commercial  intercourfe.     It  is 
probable  that  the  Britons  came  originally  from  the  conti 
nent,  frpm  v/hich  their  ifland  is  feparated  by  a  (trait  of  no 
great  extent. 

*  «  Ex  his  omnibus,  long  efunt  humaniflimi,  qui  Cantium 
incolunt  :  Quas   regio  eft  maritima  omnis  ;  nequ:  imiltuiri 

a  Gallica  differunt  coniuetudinc.'N -Cefar  De  Bello  Gilt 

lice.  Lib.  ,5, 


DISSERTATION    I.        41 

fouthern  parts  of  the  ifland,  and  their  po- 
fition  with  refpeft  to  Spain,  indicated  their 
defcent  from  the  ancient  Iberi.  But  thofe 
who  inhabited  the  (hores,  oppofite  to 
France,  refembled  the  Gauls,  in  their  re 
ligious  ceremonies,  their  courage,  and  par 
ticularly  in  their  language  :  "  Sermo  haud 
rnultum  diverfus."* 

IT  is  an  uncontroverted  point,  that  the 
primitive  language  of  Britain  was  the 
fame  as  that  of  Gaul.-f-  This  language 
was  denominated  the  Celtic,  from  the  Gel~ 
t&,  or  Kelt<Z)  a  famous  tribe  of  people  that 
inhabited  Gaul.  Many  writers  fuppofe  the 
Celtic  to  havq  been  the  primitive  ele 
mentary  language,  from  which  moft,  or  all 
the  prefent  languages  of  Europe,  and  fome 
of  the  languages  of  Ada  and  Africa,  are 
derived.  Some  authors  go  fo  far  as  to  af- 
fert  that  the  Greek  and  Roman  may  be 
traced  to  the  fame  fource.  To  prove  this 
opinion  well  founded,  they  endeavor  to 
difcover  an  affinity  between  thefe  languages, 
by  analizing  words  in  each,  and  tracing 
them  to  the  fame  elements  or  monofylla- 

bic 

*  TACITUS.  Jul.  Agric.  Vit  11. 

t "  ERAT  autem  prifca  ifthaec  Gallis  ct  Britannis  ctfmmu^ 
rns  lingua,  ultra  omnium  hilloriarura  meinoriam .antique." 
«— .Widlis  Gram, 


42        DISSERTATION    L 

bic  roots.  In  this  they  have  fucceeded  fo 
far  as  to  difcover  a  great  number  of  words, 
which,  with  fmall  dialeftical  variations^ 
are  common  to  the  Greek  and  Latin 
and  to  moft  of  the  living  languages  of 
Europe.  Perhaps  thefe  radicals,  common 
to  all  languages  of  which  we  have  any 
knowlege,  were  fufficient  to  form  a  fim- 
pie  language,  adequate  to  the  purpofes  of 
fpeech  £mong  rude  nations.  [A] 

BUT  as  the  firft  inhabitants  of  the  earth 
had,  for  many  ages,lko  method  of  fixing 
founds,  or  very  imperfect  methods,  their 
language  muft  have  been  liable  to  confid- 
erable  mutations,  even  when  they  lived  and 
converfed  together.  But  after  they  had 
feparated  from  each  other,  by  extending 
their  lettlements  into  diftant  regions,  and 
an  intercourfe  between  the  colonies  had 
ceafed,  their  languages  muft  have  in  a  great 
meafure  loft  their  affinity  to  each  other. 
The  radical  words,  common  to  all,  muft 
have  affumed  dialeftical  diftin&ions,  and 
new  objefts  and  inventions,  peculiar  to  the 
different  tribes,  muft  have  originated  new 
terms  among  each,  to  which  the  others 
were  ftrangers.  Different  nations  would 
advance,  by  very  different  degrees  of  ra 
pidity,  to  a  ftate  of  civilization,  and  as 

words 


DISSERTATION    I.        43 

words  multiply  with  ideas,  one  language 
would  become  more  copious  than  another, 
as  well  as  more  regular  and  polifhed.  In 
the  courfe  of  many  centuries,  thefe  caufes 
would  obfcure  the  common  radicals,  and 
make  fuch  acceffions  of  new  words  to  each 
dialed,  as  to  form  them  all  into  diftinft 
languages.  An  uncivilized  people  have 
occafion  for  few  words ;  perhaps  five  or 
fix  hundred  would  anfwer  all  their  pur- 
pofes.  And  if  we  fhould  thoroughly  ex- 
amin  any  of  the  prefent  languages  of  the 
world,  we  fhould  probably  find  that  the 
roots  of  the  moft  copious  do  not  amount 
to  more  than  that  number.  The  Greek, 
it  is  faid,  may  be  traced  to  about  three  or 
four  hundred  radical  words.  Thefe  roots 
or  elementary  words  are  ufually  monofyl- 
lables,  and  moftly  names  of  ienfible  ob- 
jefts.  By  applying  thefe  names  figurative 
ly,  favages  make  them  anfwer  the  purpofe 
of  exprefiing  other  ideas,  and  by  combin 
ing  them  in  an  almoft  infinite  variety  of 
ways,  civilized  nations  form  copious  and 
elegant  languages. 

THUS  it  happens  that  in  the  exifting 
languages  of  Europe,  there  are  many  words 
evidently  the  fame  ;  the  orthography  and 
pronunciation  do  not  exactly  coincide  in  all 

the 


44        DISSERTATION     I. 

the  countries  where  they  are  ufed  ;  yet  the 
refemblance  is  obvious  in  thefe  particulars ; 
and  with  refpecl  to  their  meaning,  there  is 
fuch  an  affinity,  as  to  demonftrate  that 
the  nations,  in  whofe  languages  they  are 
found,  all  fprung  from  the  fame  parents. 

THE  primitive  language  of  Europe  prob 
ably  retained  its  original  form  and  purity  in 
the  Weft,  much  later  than  on  the  borders  of 
Afia  j*  for  the  Gauls  and  Britons  had  made 
lefs  advances  in  knowlege,  than  the  eaft- 
ern  nations,  and  had  probably  fuffered 
fewer  fhocks  from  war  and  conqueft.  The 
Greeks  firft  formed  an  elegant  language 
out  of  the  barbarous  dial-efts  fpoken  on 
the  borders  of  the  Egean  Sea.  The  Ro 
mans  afterwards  did  the  fame  in  Italy,  and 
gradually  changed  the  languages  of  the 
countries  which  they  conquered,  by  intro 
ducing  their  own.  It  was  the  policy  of 
the  Roman  ftate  to  make  fubjetfs,  rather 
than  Jlav,cs>  of  their  conquered  nations  ; 
and  the  intrxxluftion  of  their  own  tongue 
among  them  was  confidered  as  a  neceffary 
ftep  towards  removing  prejudices,  facilitat 
ing  an  intercourfe  with  their  provinces,  and 

reconciling 

*  THIS  is  faid  upon  the  hypothefis,  that  the  ancient  Cel- 
ir-c  or  Britifh  had  a  common  origin  with  the  Hehrew,  Phenu 
anj  Greek.     For  proof*  of  this,  Tee  the  notes  at  the  en4. 


DISSERTATION    I.        45 

reconciling  diftant  nations  to  the  Roman 
government. 

JULIUS  CESAR  found  the  Gauls  and 
Britons  at  peace,  united  by  a  fimilarity  of 
manners  and  language,  and  by  a  famenefs 
of  intereft.  His  conqueft  of  their  coun 
tries  made  fome  inroads  upon  their  lan 
guage.  But  altho  the  Romans  had  pof- 
feffion  of  thefe  countries  more  than  four 
hundred  years,  during  which  time  Roman 
garrifons  were  ftationed  in  Gaul  and  Brit 
ain,  the  young  men  of  both  countries  were 
drafted  into  the  Roman  fervice,  and  many 
Britifh  youth  went  to  Rome  for  an  educa- 
tion,ftill  the  native  Celtic  language  remained 
without  material  alteration.  It  is  obvious 
indeed  that  many  of  the  higher  claffes  of 
people  were  acquainted  with  Latin,,  and 
there  are  traces  of  that  language  ftill  found 
among  the  Welfh,  the  descendants  of  the 
ancient  Britons.  But  the  body  of  the  peo 
ple,  either  for  want  of  opportunity  to  learn 
the  Latin,  or  thro  an  inveterate  hatred  of 
their  conquerors,  continued  wedded  to 
their  native  tongue.  This  would  have  ftill 
been  the  language  of  France  and  England, 
had  it  not  fuffered  more  violent  ihock,s 
than  by  the  Roman  conquefts. 

BUT 


46        DISSERTATION    I. 

BUT  in  the  fifth  century,  the  fouthern 
parts  of  Europe  began  to  be  alarmed  by 
the  invafion  of  the  Goths,  Vandals,  Huns 
and  other  fierce  barbarians  from  the  North. 
For  three  centuries,  all  the  fertile  prov 
inces  of  the  Roman  empire  were  ravaged 
by  thefe  hardy  invaders,  the  moft  of  whom 
fettled  in  the  countries  which  they  con 
quered. 

THESE  nations,  mixing  with  the  natives 
of  the  country  where  they  fettled,  changed 
or  corrupted  the  primitive  language.  From 
the  jargon  of  Celtic  and  Roman,  blended 
with  the  language  of  the  Franks,  Nor 
mans,  Burgundians,  &c.  fprung  the  mod 
ern  French.  From  the  mixture  of  Latin, 
with  the  language  of  the  Huns,  Lombards, 
&c.  fprung  the  prefent  Italian.  From  a 
fimilar  compofition  of  Latin,  with  the  lan 
guage  of  the  Vifigoths  and  other  northern 
tribes,  and  fome  remains  of  the  Mooriih 
language,  left  in  Spain  by  the  Saracens, 
are  formed  the  modern  Spaniih  and  Por- 
tuguefe. 

IN  the  general  defolation,  occasioned  by 
thefe  conquefts,  the  ifland  of  Britain  did 
not  efcape.     The  Saxons,  a  tribe  of  north 
ern  nations,  which  inhabited  the  coun 
try 


DISSERTATION     I.        47 

try  now  called  Denmark,  or  the  fhores 
of  the  Baltic,  now  within  the  Empire  of 
Germany,  invaded  Britain,  foon  after  the 
Roman  legions  had  been  -called  home  to 
defend  the  Empire  againft  other  tribes  of 
barbarians.  It  is  faid  the  Saxons  were  at 
firft  invited  to  affift  the  Britons  againft  the 
inroads  of  the  Pifts  or  Scots,  and  that  hav 
ing  defeated  the  invaders,  they  were  tempt 
ed,  by  the  fertility  of  the  foil,  to  remain 
in  the  ifland,  and  afterwards  took  pofleffion 
of  it  for  themfelves. 

BUT  whatever  was  the  firft  caufe  of  their 
leaving  their  native  country,  it  is  certain, 
that  numerous  bodies  of  adventurers,  at 
different  times,  went  over  and  feated  them 
felves  in  the  ifland.  They  did  not  ceafe 
till  they  had  poffeffed  themfelves  of  all  the 
fertile  and  cultivated  parts  of  England. 
The  univerfality  of  the  conqueft  is  deni- 
onftrated  by  the  total  change  of  language ; 
there  being  no  more  affinity  between  the* 
Saxon  or  Englifh,  and  the  ancient  Britifh, 
than  between  any  two  languages  of  Eu 
rope. 

THE  Britifh  however  was  not  loft.  The 
brave  inhabitants,  who  furvived  the  liber 
ty  of  their  country,  and  could  not  brook 

the 


48         DISSERTATION    t 

the  idea  of  living  with  their  conquerors* 
retired  to  the  countries  within  the  moun 
tains  on  the  weft  of  the  ifland,  now  called 
Wales  and  Cornwall,  where  they  maintain 
ed  their  independence  for  many  centuries, 
and  where  their  language  is  ftill  preferved, 
The  Welfh  and  the  Cornifh  therefore  are 
the  pureft  remains  of  the  primitive  Celtic 
language. 

To  thefe  we  may  add  the  Arnioric,  or 
language  of  the  Bas  Breton,  on  the  coaft 
of  France  -,  the  inhabitants  of  which  are 
genuin  defendants  of  the  old  Britons. 
The  time  and  occafion  of  this  fettlement  in 
France  are  not  certain.  Perhaps  a  body 
of  Britons  were  driven  thither  by  the  Sax 
on  conqueft  of  England  ;  or  what  is  more 
probable,  as  it  is  a  tradition  among  the 
people,  the  Armoricans  are  the  pofterity 
of  Ibme  Britifh  foldiers,  who  had  been  in 
the  Roman  army  when  it  was  called  to  It 
aly  to  defend  the  empire,  and  on  their  re-* 
turn,  being  informed  that  the  Saxons  had 
taken  pofleflion  of  their  native  country, 
feated  themfelves  on  the  oppofite  coaft  of 
France.* 

BUT 


Introd.  to  Hift.  of  England* 


DISSERTATION    I.        49 

BUT  whatever  was  the  caufe  of  the  fet- 
xlement,  the  language  of  the  people  is  the 
old  Britifti  or  Celtic  ;  for  altho  they  muft 
have  been  feparated  from  their  country 
men  about  twelve  or  fourteen  hundred 
years,  yet  there  is  fuch  an  affinity  ftill  be 
tween  the  Welfh  and  the  Armoric,  that 
the  Welfh  foldiers,  who  patted  thro  Brit 
tany  in  a  late  war,*  could  converfe  famil 
iarly  with  the  inhabitants.  If  any  other 
proof  than  this  were  necefTary  to  convince 
the  reader,  we  might  mention  the  name  of 
this  province,  Brittany,  and  produce  a  long 
catalogue  of  Armoric  words,  collated  with 
the  Welfh  and  Cormfli. 

ONE  would  think  that  the  Irifti,by  reafon 
of  their  vicinity  to  England,  would  have 
fpoken  the  fame  language  -y  yet  it  is  found 
that  the  old  Irifh  tongue  has  very  little  af 
finity  with  the  Welfh.  Sir  William  Tem 
ple  affertsf  that  the  Erie,  or  Caledonian, 
language,  and  the  old  Irilh,  which  are  rad 
ically  the  fame,  and  fpoken  alfo  on  the  Ifle 
of  Man,  have  no  affinity  with  any  other 
language  now  fpoken.  But  the  celebrated 

Lluyd 

*  AT  the  conqueft  6F  Belifle,     See  the  Preface,  to  Mal 
let's  North.  Antiq.  page  23. 

t  WORKS.  Vol.  3.  Introd.  to  Hift.  Eng, 

D 


50        DISSERTATION    L 

Lluyd  and  others,  who  have  been  more 
critical  in  their  inveftigations  of  this  fub- 
je£t,  maintain  that  the  Irifh  has  a  real  af 
finity  with  the  Cambrian  or  Britilh.  They 
further  fhow  that  many  names  of  places 
in  S.  Britain,  the  meaning  of  which  is  loft  in 
the  Welfh,  can  be  explained  only  by  words 
now  extant  in  the  Irifh  and  Erie.  This 
is  a  fufficient  proof  of  a  common  origin.* 

BUT  on  this  point  hiflorians  are  divided 
in  opinion.     Some  fuppofe  that  the  north 

of 

*  INDEED  a  good  reafon  may  be  given  for  the  apparent 
difference  in  the  feveral  branches  of  the  old  Celtic.  In  this 
language,  words  are  declined  by  changing  the  initial  letters, 
«r>r  by  prefixing  an  article  with  an  apoftrophe.  By  thefe 
means,  words  are  fo  altered,  that  a  fuperficial  obferver  may 
confound  the  radical  letters,  with  thofe  which  are  added  for 
the  fake  of  exprelTing  cTifferent  relations.  Thus  the  Brit- 
ifh  word  pen  fignifies,  a  head  ',pengurr  a  man's  head  ;  iben, 
his  head  ;  i  ph,en,  her  head  ;  y*m  when.,  my  head.  This  by 
the  way  is  no  contemptible  evidence  that  the  Britifh  was 
derived  from  the  Phenician  or  Hebrew,  in  the  latter  of 
which,  words  are  declined  by  prefixes,  as  well  as  fuffixes. 

FOR  the  difference  between  the  Irifh  and  Britifh,  Lluyd 
aftigm,  other  reaions.  The  anccitors  of  the  Irifh  and  High 
land  Scots,  who  were  called  Guydelians,  might  have  been 
the  original  Celts,  who  firft  inhabited  Britain  ;  and  the 
Cymri  or  Welfh,  another  race,  or  a  branch  of  the  Celtic 
Cimbri,  might,  either  by  colonization  orronqueft,  take  pof- 
feflion  of  Britain,  and  introduce  a  very  different  dialect  of 
<he  fame  radical  language.  The  Iriih  language  might  be 
ibmewhat  changed  by  Cantabrian  words,  imported  by  tl^e 
Scots  from  Spain  ;  and  the  Cymraeg  or  Britifh  might  fuffer 
confideraMe  changes  during  400  years  fubjeftion  to  the  Ro-» 
bee  Prcf.  to  Mallet's  North,  Antiq.  page  42, 


DISSERTATION    I.        51 

of  Ireland  was  firft  peopled  by  emigrations 
from  Scotland,  and  the  famenefs  of  their 
language  renders  this  opinion  probable. 
But  whence  do  the  Scots  derive  their  ori 
gin  ?  The  moft  probable  account  of  the 
fettlement  of  Scotland  is,  that  it  was  peo 
pled  from  Norway  or  fome  other  northern 
country,  by  a  tribe  of  thofe  nations  that 
went  under  the  general  denomination  of 
Scythians  ;  for  Scot  and  Scythian  are  from 
the  fame  root* 

THERE  are  writers,  however,  who  con 
tend  that  Ireland  muft  have  been  fettled 
from  Spain,  for  there  are  many  Spanifh 
words  found  in  the  language  of  the  coun 
try.  But  the  number  of  thefe  is  too  in- 
confiderable  to  render  the  argument  con- 
clufive. 

WITHIN  a  few  years,  an  attempt  has 
been  made  to  trace  the  origin  of  the  Irifli 
nation,  to  the  Carthaginians.  The  au 
thor  of  a  Imall  work,  entitled  <c  An  Eflay 
on  the  Antiquities  of  Ireland,"  has  exam 
ined,  in  a  play  of  Plautus,  the  Punic  fpeech 
which  has  the  marks  of  being  the  genuin 
language  of  Carthage,  and  has  collated  it 
with  the  ancient  Irilh.  In  this  fpeech 
D  z  there 


S*        DISSERTATION    I, 

there  is  a  furpriling  affinity  between  the 
languages.  [BJ 

BUT  without  running  into  a  field  of 
conjecture,  it  is  fufficient  for  my  purpofe 
to  obferve,  that  the  Irifh,  the  Erfe,  and  the 
language  fpdken  on  the  Ifle  of  Man,  are 
indifputably  the  lame,  and  muft  have  been 
very  ancient :  That  the  Wellh,  the  Corn- 
ifh,  and  the  Armonc  are  now  a  diftinft 
language,  and  unqueftionably  the  remains 
of  the  Celtic,  or  that  language  which  was 
common  to  Gaul  and  Britain,  when  they 
were  invaded  by  Julius  Cefar.  The  Irifh 
and  the  Britifli  may  ibe  as  diftinft  as  the 
Hebrew  and  the  Britifh,  and  yet  a  critical 
ctymologift  may  difcover  in  both,  common 
radicals  enough  to  convince  him  that  both 
are  the  offspring  of  the  fame  parent, 

HITHERTO  our  refearches  have  thrown 
tut  little  light  upon  the  prefent  Englifh 
language.  For  the  fubftance  of  this  we 
muft  look  to  the  Saxon  branch  of  the  Teu^ 
tonic,* 

THE 

*  "  ERAT  autem  ilia  Anglo-Saxonum  lingua  antique  Teu- 
tonicas  propago,  (nifi  antiquae  Gothic*  feu  Geticae  potius 
dixeris,  unde  forfan  ipfa  Teutonica  duxerit  originem)  ut  et 
Francica  ilia  in  Galliam  advecta,  et  hodierna  Germanica, 
Belgica,  Danica,  Suevica;  Boruffica,  ali?e^ue  affines  ^^- 
" 


DISSERTATION    I.        £3 

THE  Teutones  and  Goths  or  Getse  were 
the  nations  that  inhabited  the  north  of 
Europe.  They  were  in  a  rude  ftate  and 
had  no  hiftorical  records  by  which  their  de- 
fcent  could  be  afcertained.  They  however 
had  a  clafs  of  men  under  the  denomina- 
tion  of  Scalds  or  Bards,  whofe  bufinefs  it 
was  to  recount  in  verfe  the  illuftrious  ac 
tions  of  their  heroes,  and  to  preferve  their 
traditions.  Thefe  Scalds  all  agree  that 
their  anceftors  came  from  the  eaft  $*  and 
it  is  well  known  alfo  that  Herodotus  men 
tions  the  Germans  as  a  Perfian  people.-f* 
It  is  probable  that  they  extended  their  fet- 
tlements  gradually,  or  were  driven  from 
Afia  by  the  Roman  invaiions  under  Pom- 
pey,  during  the  reign  of  Mithridates,  and 
under  the  condu£l  of  Odin,  their  hero  and 
lawgiver,  eftablifhed  themfelves  on  the 
ihores  of  the  Baltic* 

FROM  thefe  nations  proceeded  thofe  fierce 
and  numerous  warriors,  who,  under  dif 
ferent  leaders  invaded  and  fubdued  all  the 
fouthern  parts  of  Europe  -y  changed  the 
government,  the  manners  and  the  language 

of 

*  MALLET'S  North*  Antiq. 

*  <f  AAA.C*  &  Usfxran  «<n  ci&,  ITaj/SfAaJC 

i/'— Herodotus  in  Clio.  ed»  1570,  page 


54        DISSERTATION    L 

of  the  primitive  inhabitants,  and  gave  them 
their  prefent  complexion.  The  Saxons, 
who  inhabited  the  northern  parts  of  Ger 
many,  or  Denmark,  were  the  tribe  that 
conquered  England,  and  introduced  a  lan 
guage  and  a  form  of  government,  the  prin 
ciples  of  which  are  ftill  exiftent  among 
their  defendants,  both  in  England  and  A- 
merica.  This  happened  in  the  fifth  and 
fixth  centuries. 

OUR  language  is  therefore  derived  from 
the  fame  flock  as  the  German,  the  Dutch, 
the  Danifh,  the  Swedifh,  and  the  Swifs. 
Of  all  thefe  branches,  the  German  is  per 
haps  the  principal,  and  that  which  has  fuf- 
fered  the  leafl  by  the  violence  of  conqueft 
or  the  changes  of  time.  Between  this  and 
the  pure  Englifh,  there  is  a  clofe  affinity, 
as  may  be  obferved  by  any  perfon  indiffer 
ently  well  acquainted  with  both. 

FROM  the  eftablifhment  of  the  Saxons 
in  England,  to  the  Norman  conqueft,  the 
language  of  the  country  fuffered  but  little 
variation.  The  invafions  of  the  Danes  and 
their  government  of  the  kingdom,  during 
a  ihort  period,  could  not  but  afteft  the 
language,  yet  not  materially,  as  the  ifland 
foffered  a  change  of  mafters,  rather  than 

of 


DISSERTATION    L         55 

of  people  or  laws  5  and  indeed  the  Danes 
themfelves  fpoke  a  dialeft  of  the  Saxon 
language. 

BUT  the  conqueft  by  William,  the  Nor 
man,  in  1066,  introduced  important  change 
es  into  the  language,  as  well  as  the  govern 
ment  of  the  Englifh  nation.  William  was 
followed  by  multitudes  of  his  countrymen  j 
thefe  formed  his  court,  and  filled  the  rich 
livings,  temporal  and  ecclefkftical,  Which 
were  forfeited  or  left  vacant  by  the  death 
of  their  former  pofleflbrs  who  were  flain  in 
the  battle  of  Haftings.  The  language  of 
the  conquerors,  which  was  a  mixture  of 
Latin  and  Norman,  immediately  became 
fafhionable  at  Court,  and  was  ufed  in  all 
legiflative  and  judicial  proceedings.  It 
continued  to  be  the  polite  and  law  language 
of  the  nation  about  three  centuries  ;  when, 
in  the  thirty  fixth  year  of  Edward  III.*  an 
a<5l  of  parliament  was  paffed,  ordaining 
that  in  future  all  pleas  in  courts  fhould  be 
made  in  Englifh  and  recorded  in  Latin. 
In  the  preamble  to  this  aft,  the  reafon  af~ 
figned  for  making  it  is,  "  that  the  people 
of  the  realm  did  not  underftand  French.-j- 

THIS 

*1362. 

i  IN  this  a£  of  Edward  ill.  thetc  is  an  exprefs  referva- 
tk>n  iu  favor  of  particular  law-phrafcs  or  technical  terms, 

which, 


$6       DISSERTATION    t 

THIS  proves  that  the  Norman  French 
was  fpoken  only  by  the  nobility,  who  were 
jnoftly  of  Norman  extraftion,  and  by  the 
higher  orders  of  men  in  office,  at  court,  or 
in  the  cities.  The  body  of  the  people,  de- 
fcendants  of  the  Saxons,  ftill  retained  their 
primitive  tongue,*  During  this  period, 
when  French  was  the  polite,  and  Saxon 
the  vulgar  language  of  the  Englifli,  the 
Latin  was  alfo  underftood  by  the  learned  f 
who  were  moftly  the  regular  and  fecular 
clergy.  On  the  revival  of  literature  in 
Europe,  Latin  was  ftudied  with  claffical 
correftnefs,  and  the  number  and  excellence 
of  the  Greek  and  Roman  authors,  with 
the  elegance  of  the  languages,  have  recom 
mended  them  to  the  attention  of  fucceeding 
generations.  The  records  of  parliament 
and  of  judicial  proceedings  were  kept  m 

Latin, 


by  long  ufe^  had  acquired  peculiar  force  and  propri-* 
Sty,  and  whofe  place  could  not  be  \vell  Supplied  by  Englifh. 
words  or  phrafes.  Hence  the  number  of  French  words 
ufed  in  law  proceedings* 


*  WE  have  the  teftimony  of  Robert,  Earl  of  Gloucefter 
(who  wrote  under  Henry  III.  and  Edward  I.)  to  this  pur- 
pofe.  Page  364. 

*<  Vor  bote  a  man  couth  French,  me  tolth  of  hym  well  lute, 

**  Aclowe  men  holdeth  to  Englyfs  and  to  her  kunde  fpeeche  yute.  " 

For  but  a  man  knoweth  French,  men  told  of  him  well  lit- 
tie,  and  lowe  men  holdeth  to  Englifh  and  to  their  native 
tongue.  -  That  is,  unlefs  a  jnan  could  fpeak  French  h# 
tvas  iittk  eileemed^ 


DISSERTATION    L        # 

Latin,  from  the  thirty  fixth  of  Edward  IIL 
to  the  fourth  of  George  II. *  when,  by  aft 
of  parliament,  the  Englijk  was  ordered  to 
be  the  language  of  the  Englijh  laws  and 
public  records.  Of  thefe  three  languages* 
the  Saxon,  the  Norman  French  and  the 
Latin,  our  prefent  Engliih  is  cornpofed. 

THE  incorporation  of  the  Roman  and 
other  foreign  tongues  with  the  Englifh* 
took  place  principally  under  the  firft  Nor 
man  kings.  It  was  attended  with  fome 
difficulty,  and  Chaucer  has  been  cenfured 
by  his  cotemporaries  for  introducing  cart 
loads  of  French  words  into  his  writings.^ 

LANGUAGE  is  the  effeft  of  neceffity, 
and  when  a  nation  has  a  language  which 
is  competent  to  all  their  purpofes  of  com 
municating  ideas,  they  will  not  embrace 
new  words  and  phrafes.  This  is  the  rea- 
fon  why  the  yeomanry  of  the  Englifh  na 
tion  have  never  adopted  the  improvements 

of 

*  173*' 

f  "Ex  hac  msrlefano  novetatis  pruritu,  B'elgae  Qallicay 
Voces  pafiim  civitate  fuadonando  patrii  fermonis  puritatem 
nuper  non  leviter  inquinarunt,  et  Chaucerus  Poeta,  peflima 
cxemplo,  integris  vocum  plauftris  ex  tadem  Gallia  in  noftram 
linguam  invents,  earn,  nimis  antea  a  Normannorum  victoria 
adulteratam,  omni  fiye  nativa  gratia  et  nit  ore  fpoliavit," 
Etymol,  L,  A, 


53        DISSERTATION    L 

of  the  Englifh  tongue.  The  Saxon 
competent  to  moft  of  the  purpofes  of  an 
agricultural  people  5  and  the  clafs  of  men 
who  have  not  advanced  beyond  that  ftate, 
which  in  faft  makes  the  body  of  the  na 
tion,  at  leafl  in  America,  feldom  ufe  any 
words  except  thofe  of  Saxon  original. 

BUT  as  men  proceed  in  the  progrefs  of 
fociety,  their  ideas  multiply,  and  new  words 
are  neceflary  to  exprefs  them.  They  muft 
therefore  either  invent  words,  or  combine 
thofe  before  ufed  into  compounds,  or  bor 
row  words  of  fuitable  import  from  a  for 
eign  language.  The  latter  method  was 
principally  purfued  by  the  Englifh.  The 
learned  of  the  nation  fpoke  and  wrote  Lat 
in,  which  had  been  the  language  of  a  po 
lite  and  improved  nation,  and  confequent- 
ly  abounds  with  terms  in  the  various  arts 
and  fciences.  When  the  Englifh  found 
their  native  tongue  deficient,  they  had  re- 
courfe  to  the  Roman  or  Greek,  where  they 
were  immediately  fupplied  with  words,  ex- 
preflive  of  their  new  ideas,  and  eafily  con 
forming  to  the  genius  of  the  Englifh  lan 
guage. 

THE  Englifh  retained  its  Saxon  appear 
ance  till  the  twelfth  century.[C]  From  this 

period 


DISSERTATION    i;        59 

period  to  Chaucer,  who  wrote  in  the  reign 
of  Edward  III.  about  the  year- 1360  or  70, 
the  changes  were  flow  and  gradual.  Chau 
cer  was  a  man  of  a  very  liberal  education ; 
well  verfed  in  the  Greek  and  Roman  au 
thors  -,  and  his  mind  had  been  improved  by 
his  travels.  His  genius  and  acquirements 
led  him  to  ftray  from  the  common  ftile  of 
writing,  and  enrich  his  verfe  with  the  ele 
gance  of  the  Provencal  language,  at  that 
time  the  moft  polifhed  in  Europe.*  His 
abilities,  his  reputation,  and  his  influence 
at  court,  enabled  him,  in  oppofition  to 
his  adverfaries,  to  introduce  many  beau 
ties  and  much  energy  intoour  language.[D) 

FROM  Chaucer  to  Addifon  our  language 
was  progreflively  refined,  and  enriched 
with  a  variety  of  words,  adequate  to  all 
its  ufes  among  a  people  highly  improved. 
The  French  language  has  furnifhed  us  with 
military  terms  ;  the  Dutch  with  iea  phrafes; 
the  Greek  and  Roman  with  words  proper  to 
form  and  polifli  the  poetical,  hiftorical  and 
rhetorical  fliles,  and  with  terms  in  mathe 
matics,  philofophy  and  phyfic  $  the  mod 
ern 

*RAiMONDlV.of  Aragon,  count  of  Provence,  rendered 
his  Court  a  temple  of  the  mufes,  and  to  this  reforted  the 
lovers  of  the  Belles  Lettres  from  every  part  of  Europe.  A- 
bout  the  year  1300,  a  taile  for  the  Provencal  language  and 
poetry  was  imbibed  in  Italy,  and  foon  after  in  England,—* 
Denina,  Chap.  44. 


So       DISSERTATION    t 

ern  Italian  has  fupplied  us  with  terms  lit 
inufic,  painting  and  fculpture ;  and  in  the 
Saxon,  the  ground- work  of  the  whole,  the 
yeomanry  find  all  the  words  for  which 
they  have  any  ufe  in  domeftic  life  or  in 
the  agricultural  and  moft  fimple  median* 
ical  employments* 

IN  this  progrefs,  the  language  has  not 
only  been  enriched  with  a  copious  fupply 
of  words,  but  the  accent  of  words  has  gen* 
erally  been  eftablifhed  in  fuch  a  manner 
as  to  render  pronunciation  melodious* 
The  fpoken  language  is  alfo  foftened,  by  an 
omiffion  of  the  harfh  and  guttural  founds 
which  originally  belonged  to  the  language, 
and  which  are  flill  retained  by  the  Ger* 
mans,  Scotch  and  Dutch.  At  the  fame 
time,  it  is  not,  like  the  French,  enervated 
by  a  lofs  of  confonants.  It  holds  a  mean 
between  the  harfhnefs  of  the  German,  and 
the  feeblenefs  of  the  French.  It  has  more 
fmoothnefs  and  fluency  than  the  northern 
languages,  and  lefs  mufic  in  its  vocal 
founds,  than  the  Spanifh  and  Italian.  As 
the  Englifh  have  attempted  every  branch 
of  fcience,  and  generally  proceeded  farther 
in  their  improvements  than  other  nations, 
fo  their  language  is  proportionably  copi 
ous  and  expreffive. 

REMARKS. 


f 
DISSERTATION    L 

REMARKS, 


HAVING  given  this  general  hiftoryand 
the  prefent  ftate  of  the  language,  I  proceed 
to  ibme  remarks  that  naturally  refult  from 
the  fubje6l. 

i.  THE  primitive  language  of  the  Eng- 
lifh  nation  was  the  Saxon,  and  the  words 
derived  from  that,  now  conftitute  the 
ground-work  of  modern  Englifh.  Hence 
all  the  rules  of  inflection,  and  moft  of  the 
rules  of  conftruftion,  are  Saxon.  The  plu 
ral  terminations  of  nouns,  the  variations 
of  the  pronouns,  the  endings  which  mark 
the  comparifon  of  adjeftives,  and  the  in- 
fleftions  of  the  verbs,  are  wholly  of  Teu 
tonic  origin.  For  this  reafon$  the  rules 
of  grammatical  conftruftion  and  the  pro 
priety  of  particular  phrafes,  can  be  afcer- 
tained  only  by  the  ancient  Saxon,  and  the 
modern  Englifh  writings.  The  Greek  and 
Roman  languages  were  conftrufted  on  dif 
ferent  principles,  which  circumflance  has 
not  been  fufficiently  attended  to,  by  thofe 
who  have  attempted  to  compile  Englifh 
Grammars.  The  confequence  is,  that 
falfe  principles  have  been  introduced  and 
taught  as  the  rules  of  the  Englifh  lan 

guage, 


6*        DISSERTATION    L 

guage,  by  which  means  very  eminent  writ 
ers  have  been  led  into  miftakes. 

2.  IT  has  been  remarked  that  the  com 
mon  people,  defendants  of  the  Saxons, 
life  principally  words  derived  from  the  na 
tive  language  of  their  anceftors,  with  few 
derivatives  from  the  foreign  tongues,  for 
which  they  have  no  occafion.  This  faft 
fuggefts  the  impropriety  of  writing  fer- 
mons,  or  other  difcourfes  defigned  for  gen 
eral  ufe,  in  the  elevated  Englifti  ftile.  To 
adapt  a  ftile  to  common  capacities,  the 
language  fhould  confift,  as  much  as  poffi- 
ble,  of  Saxon  words,  or  of  Latin  and  French 
derivatives  which  are  introduced  into  fa 
miliar  difcourfe.  The  modern  tafte  for  in 
troducing  uncommon  words  into  writings, 
for  rounding  periods,  and  rifmg  in  to' what 
is  falfely  called  the  elegant  and  fublime  ftile, 
has  had  an  unhappy  effe6t  in  rendering 
language  obfcu^e  or  unintelligible.* 

3.  THE 

*  A  REMAFKAPLE  example  ofthiskind  of  flile,  we  have 
in  Elphinflone's  principles  of  the  Englifh  Language.  The 
author  has  taken  great  pains  to  be  obfcure,  and  has  iuccceded 
to  admiration. 

OF  this  kind  of  ftile,  the  reader  may  fee  afpecimen  in  the 
following  paffage,  ttaken  fronqi  Young's  fpint  of  Athens. 
Page  6. 


DISSERTATION    I.        63 

3.  THE  number  and  perfe&ion  of  the 
languages  from  which  the  Englifh  is  col- 
lefted,  muft  account  for  its  copioufnefs  and 
the  multitude  of  fynonimous  words  with 
which  it  abounds. 

A  PRIMITIVE  unmixed  language  rarely 
contains  two  words  of  the*  fame  fignifica- 
tion.  On  the  contrary,  rude  nations  often 
ufe  one  word  to  exprefs  feveral  ideas,  which 
have  fome  refemblance  or  analogy  to  each 
other,  in  the  conftitution  of  things. 

FROM 

"SuRELY,  in  every  mind,  there  Is  an  emulation  of  virtuous 
fuperiority,  which,  however  fortune  or  the  meaner  paflions 
may  hebitate  its  powers,  (till,  at  every  example  of  fucccfs 
in  the  particular  objeft  of  its  predile&ion,  glows  into  a  mo 
mentary  flame,  which  from  frequent  refufcitation  may  ac 
quire  a  (lability  and  ftrength  fufficient  to  reach  at  the  at 
tainment  of  what,  at  firft,  was  regarded  folely  as  matter  of 
admiration  ;  the  idea  of  imitation  which  hath  thus  enraptur 
ed  the  fancy,  may  in  times  of  perilous  crifis  fomewhat  ele 
vate  the  mind  and  influence  the  conduct  ;  and  if  (uch  ever 
may  be  the  effeft,  what  other  lecture  can  ballance  the  utili 
ty  of  that,  which  thus  animates  the  man,  and  urges  him  to  , 
noble  and  difinterefted  fervices  in  a  good,  great  and  public  *- 
caufe." 

THE  author  could  hardly  have  invented  an  arrangement, 
better  calculated  to  obfcure  his  meaning. 

IT  is  faid  ofMoltere,  that  before  he  would  fuffer  a  new 
play  of  his  to  be  afted,  he  read  it  to  an  old  woman,  and 
judged,  by  the  effeft  it  had  upon  her,  what  reception  it 
would  meet  with  on  the  ftage.  It  is  a  pity,  fome  modern 
do  not  copy  the  example. 


64        DISSERTATION    L 

FROM  the  poverty  of  a  language  pro 
ceed  repetitions  of  the  fame  word,  to  ex- 
prefs  an  idea  with  particular  force,  or  in  the 
fuperlative  degree.  Hence  the  Hebraifms, 
as  they  are  called,  of  the  Bible  ;  to  rejoice 
with  joy  ;  to  fear  with  great  fear.  This 
mode  of  fpeaking  is  frequent  among  all 
nations  whofe  languages  are  imperfeft. 

BUT  the  Englilh,  on  the  other  hand,  a- 
bounds  with  fynonimous  terms,  fo  that  a 
repetition  of  words  is  generally  unnecefTary, 
even  when  there  is  a  neceffity  of  repeat 
ing  the  idea  in  the  fame  fentence. 

THIS  copioufnefs,  while  it  affords  great 
advantages  to  a  judicious  writer,  may  alfo 
be  abufed,,  and  become  the  caufe  of  a  pro 
lix  verbofe  ftile.  Inftances  of  this  feult 
occur  in  almoft  every  author  ;  it  is  one 
of  the  greateft,  as  well  as  moft  frequent 
faults  in  writing,  and  yet  has  fcarcely  been 
cenfured  by  critics.* 

THERE  are  indeed  but  few  inftances  in 
which  two  or  three  words  exprefs  precifely 

the  " 

*  DR.  Blair  has  made  a  few  excellent  remarks  on  this 

fault,  under  the  article  Precifion,  Lefture  10.     I  do  not  re- 

*    member  to  have  ieea  any  other  criticifms  upon  this  Tub- 


DISSERTATION    I.        65 

the  fame  idea;  but  there  are  many  inftances 
of  words  conveying  nearly  the  fame  fenfe» 
which  are  thrown  together  by  carelefs 
writers  without  the  leaft  occafion.  Take 
for  example  a  paflage  of  Mr.  Addifon'-s 
Cato : 

«  So  the  pure,  limpid  ftream,  when/0w/  with  Jlains 
Of  rufliing  torrents  and  defcending  ra  ins, 
Works  itfelf  dear  and  as  it  runs  refines^ 
Till  by  degrees  the  floating  mirror  (nines.** 

PURE  and  limpid  are  here  too  nearly  fy~ 
nonimous  to  be  applied  to  the  fame  objeft. 
The  fame  objection  lies  to  the  ufe  of  ''foul 
with  /tains"  Between  working  clear  and 
refining^  there  is  perhaps  no  difference  in 
idea  :  And  the  arrangement  in  the  fecond 
line  is  obje6lionable,  for  the  confequence 
is  placed  before  the  caufe  ;  rujhing  torrents 
being  the  confequence  of  defcending  rains. 
Such  an  aflemblage  of  fynonimous  words 
clogs  and  enfeebles  the  expreffion,  and  fa 
tigues  the  mind  of  the  reader.  Writers 
of  an  inferior  clafs  are  particularly  fond  of 
crouding  together  epithets.  If  they  would 
defcribe  a  man  they  hate,  he  is  a  low,  vile, 
mean,  defpicable,  contemptible  fellow.  If 
they  would  defcribe  a  man  of  an  amiable 
character,  he  is  the  moft  kind,  humane,  lov- 
tender  y  affectionate  being  imaginable. 
E  Epithets, 


66        DISSERTATION    L 

Epithets,  fo  liberally  beftowed,  confufe  our 
ideas  and  leave  the  mind  without  any  dif- 
tinft  knowlege  of  the  chara&er.  [E] 

To  a  copioufnefs  of  language,  on  the 
other  hand,  may  be  afcribed  the  decline 
of  a£lion  in  fpeaking,  and  the  want  of  an 
imation.  When  nations  have  but  few 
words  to  exprefs  their  ideas,  they  have  re- 
courfeto  figures,  to  fignificant  tones,  looks 
and  geftures,  to  fupply  the  defeft.  Hence 
the  figurative  language  of  the  Orientals  of 
antiquity ;  hence  the  imagery  of  the  Cale 
donian  Bard  •,*  the  bold  metaphorical  lan 
guage  of  the  American  natives,  and  the 
expreffive  tones  and  gefliculations  that  at 
tend  their  fpeaking. 

To  this  caufe  alfo  muft  we  afcribe  the 
mufic  of  the  Greek  language,  and  the  ac 
tion  which  accompanied  the  rehearfals  on 
the  ftage.  What  was  the  effeft  of  necefli- 
ty  at  firft,  became  afterwards  a  matter  of 
art.  This  was  the  origin  of  the  panto 
mime.  Modern  operas  are  alfo  an  imita 
tion  of  the  ancient  mufical  rehearfals  of 
the  theater.-f- 

BUT 

*  OSSIAN. 

f  SEE  Blair,  Le£lure  6,  and  Condillac,  in  his  Efiay  on 
Ahe  Origin  of  Human  Knowlege,   The  dancing  of  Davidyan<i 

others- 


DISSERTATION    I.        67 

BUT  as  languages  become  rich  and  fur- 
nifh  words  for  communicating  every  idea, 
aftion  muft  naturally  ceafe.  Men  will  not 
give  themfelves  the  pain  of  exerting  their 
limbs  and  body  to  make  themfelves  under- 
ftood,  when  a  bare  opening  of  their  lips 
will  anfwer  the  purpofe.  This  may  be 
affigned  as  one  principal  caufe  of  the  de 
cline  of  eloquence  in  modern  ages,  partic 
ularly  among  the  Englifh. 

To  the  fame  caufe,  in  part,  may  we  af- 
cribe  the  difference  in  the  French  and  Eng- 
lilh  manner  of  fpeaking.  It  is  a  common 
obfervation,  that  the  French  ufe  more  ac 
tion  and  are  more  animated  in  converfa- 
tion,  than  the  Englifh.  The  caufe  ufually 
affigned,  is,  the  natural  vivacity  of  the 
French  nation  ;  which  appears  to  me  not 
fatisfaftory  ;  for  the  Germans,  who  refem- 

ble 

others,  mentioned  in  the  Old  Teftament,  was  a  folemn  ex- 
ercifc,  in  which  aftion  was  joined  with  words  to  exprefs  i- 
deas. 

* 

IT  is  faid  to  have  been  a  difpute  between  Cicero  and 
Rofcius,  whether  the  former  could  exprefs  an  idea  by  a 
greater  variety  of  words,  or  the  latter  by  a  greater  variety  of 

geflure. "Satis   conftat,   contendere  eum   (Ciceronem) 

com  ipfo  hiflrione  (RofcioJ  folitum,  utrum  ille  facpius  ean- 
dem  fententiam  variis  geftibus  efficeret,  an  ipfe  per  elequen- 
tiae  copiam  fermone  diverfo  pronunciaret."— -Macrob. 
Saturn,  2,  10. 

E  2 


68        DISSERTATION    L 

ble  the  French,  in  fome  degree,  in  their 
manner  of  fpeaking,  are  neverthelefs  a 
more  grave  people  than  the  Englifh. 

I  SUSPECT  that  the  difference  may  in 
part  be  thus  accounted  for.  The  French, 
tho  by  no  means  a  barren  language,  wants 
words  to  exprefs  many  ideas,  for  which  the 
Englifh  is  provided.  For  example,  the 
Englilh  has  two  forms  for  the  future  tenfe 
of  verbs  ;  Jhall  and  will ;  each  of  which 
has  a  diftinft  meaning.  Shall  exprefles 
event  in  the  firfl  perfon,  and  promife, 
command  or  threatning  in  the  fecond  and 
third.  Willy  in  the  firft  perfon,  promifes  ; 
In  the  fecond  and  third,  foretells.  The 
French  has  no  fuch  diftinftion.  The 
phrafe^V  lit}  payer  at  >  the  only  form  of  the 
future,  cannot  convey  fuch  diftinft  mean 
ings,  as  promife  and  event  >  unlefs  accompa 
nied  with  fome  expreffive  tone  or  gefture. 
A  Frenchman  therefore,  to  exprefs  the  force 
of  the  Englifh,  /  will  pay,  muft  fupply  the 
want  of  a  diftinft  word  by  aftion,  or  have 
recourfe  to  a  circumlocution.  The  fame 
remark  holds  with  refpeft  to  would  and 
Jhouldy  which,  in  a  variety  of  combinations, 
retain  diftinft  fignifications. 

THE  French  has  properly  but  one  word, 

plume,  for  the  three  Englifli  words,  feather, 

pen 


DISSERTATION    I.        69 

pen  and  quill.  Its  verbs  have  not  fuch  a 
variety  of  combinations  to  exprefs  the  pre- 
cife  time  of  an  aftion  as  the  Englifh.  J'e- 
cris  is  the  only  phrafe  for  the  Englifh,  I 
write  and  I  am  writing,  which  have  diftinft 
ufes  ;  and  Ldo  not  know  whether  there  is 
any  phrafe  ufed  in  French  which  will  ex- 
aftly  correfpond  with  the  Englifh  phrafes 
anfwering  to  the  inceptive  verb  of  the  Ro 
mans,  /  am  going  to  write,  or,  am  about 
writing.* 

THIS  folution  of  a  difficulty,  which  has 
occurred  to  many  people,  in  comparing  the 

manners 

*  I  CANNOT  think  the  French  devenir  prefixed  to  a  verb 
anfwers  exaftly  to  both  thefe  Engiiih  forms.  The  defi 
ciency  of  the  French  in  this  refpeft,  may  be  obferved  in 
the  following  paflage  : 

"  S'IL  eft  vrai  que  vous  aimiez  la  juftice,  &  que  vous  a(- 
liez  en  Crete  pour  apprendre  les  loix  du  bon  roi  Minos,  n'- 
endurciflfez  point  votre  cceur  contre  mes  foupirs  &  centre 
mes  larmes."— — Telemaque,  Liv.  4. 

IF  we  tranflate  the  paflage  thus  :  "If  it  is  true  that  you 
love  juftice  and  go  to  Crete,"  &c.  we  lofe  the  force  of  the 
verb  attiez  ;  for  the  fenfe  is  evidently,  are  going,  are  now  on 
your  journey.  "  If  it  is  true  that  you  Love  juftice  and  are. 
going  to  Crete,"  &c. 

I  N  French  the  verbs  aimiez  and  alliez  are  both  in  the  fame 
tenfe,  and  have  the  fame  form  of  conftruftion  ;  in  Engiiih 
the  verbs  (hould  be  in  the  fame  tenfe,buthave  different  forms 
of  conftru&ion.  In  French  the  force  of  alliez  is  collected 
from  the  fenfe  of  the  paffage  ;  but  in  Englifh,  it  is  exprdled 
by  a  particular  conftru&ion. 

E  3 


70        DISSERTATION    I. 

manners  of  the  Englifh  and  French,  may 
not  be  the  true  one ;  but  it  appears  ration 
al.  Other  caufes  allo  have  a  material 
influence  upon  eloquence,  particularly  the 
form  of  government  and  the  ftate  of  focie- 
ty.  In  thefe  refpefts  England  and  France 
may  not  be  fo  favorable  to  the  cultivation 
of  oratory,  as  were  the  republics  of  Greece 
and  Rome.  But  if  a  free  government  is 
the  beft  foil  for  the  growth  of  eloquence, 
why  fhould  it  flourifh  in  France  rather 
than  in  England,  which  is  faid  to  be  the 
faft  with  refpeft  to  pulpit  eloquence  ?  The 
genius  of  the  nation  may  have  its  effeft  ; 
but  it  is  prefumed,  the  ftate  of  the  lan 
guage  may  be  confidered  as  an  auxiliary 
caufe,  if  not  a  principal. 

FROM  the  foregoing  hiftory  of  the  lan 
guage,  we  learn  the  caufes  of  its  incorreft 
orthography.  The  Saxon  charafters,  fome 
of  which  were  Roman,  both  in  fhape  and 
power,  while  others  were  peculiar  to  the 
language,  continued  in  ufe  till  the  four 
teenth  century.  Thefe  were  afterwards  laid 
afide  for  the  Old  Englifh  characters ,  as  they 
are  ufually  called  -,  which  were  introduced 
with  the  art  of  printing  from  Germany,* 

and 

*ON  the  firfl  invention  of  printing,  letters  were  cut  in 
wood  and  fixed.     They  were  afterwards  engraved  upon 

metal,  . 


DISSERTATION    I.        71 

and  continued  in  ufe,  till  within  a  century. 
But  both  the  Saxon  and  German  letters 
were  much  inferior  to  the  Roman  in  the 
fimplicity  and  elegance  of  their  form  ;  for 
which  reafon  moft  of  the  European  na 
tions  have  rejedled  their  primitive  charac-* 
ters  and  adopted  the  Roman.* 

IN  changing  the  charafters  of  an  alpha 
bet,  as  well  as  in  exprefling  the  founds  of 
one  language  by  letters  of  an  other,  fome 
difficulty  will  often  arife  from  the  want  of 
a  perfeft  correfpondence  between  the  true 
founds  of  letters  in  both.  Altho  there  is, 
and  muft  be,  a  great  uniformity  in  the  ar 
ticulate  founds  of  all  men,  yet  there  are  al- 
fo  differences  peculiar  to  each  nation,  which 
others  have  not  proper  charafters  to  ex- 
prefs. 

THUS  the  Romans,  when  they  would 
exprefs  the  found  of  the  Greek  6  and  of 
7,  for  want  of  fuitable  charafters,  wrote 

tb 

metal,  flill  fixed.  The  third  ftage  of  improvement  was  the 
cafling  of  moveable  types.  It  is  probable  that  this  was  a 
work  of  labor  and  expenfe  ;  and  it  muft  have  been  a  long 
time,  before  they  cafl  more  than  one  kind  of  character. 
Hence  the  German  chara&er  was  ufed  in  England. 

*THE  Germans  and  Dutch  ?,re  exceptions:  They  ufe 
their  old  characters  in  their  own  language  ;  but  they  ufe  the 
Latin  eharacl^r  and  language  in  works  of  fcience. 


72        DISSERTATION    I. 

th  and  ch.  We  conclude  from  this  cir- 
cumftance,  that  the  Greek  iound  of  the 
former  was  that  of  t  followed  by  an  afpi- 
rate,  and  the  latter,  that  of  k  with  an  af- 
pirate.  Yet  it  is  very  probable  that  the 
founds  were  guttural  in  Greek,  and  not 
exactly  reprefented  by  the  Latin  combina-* 

tions  th  and  cb. 

i 

THUS  two  Saxon  charafters  are  repre 
fented  in  modern  Englifh,  by  the  Latin 
combination  th,  as  in  think,  thou.  Thefe 
Saxon  charafters  were  fingle  letters  and 
had  diftin6t  powers.  We  preferve  the  dif- 
tinftion  of  founds  to  this  day,  but  are  fub- 
jeft  to  the  inconvenience  of  having  no 
mark  by  which  the  eye  can  difcern  that 
diftinftion. 

ON  the  other  hand,yZ>  was  ufually  writ* 
ten  by  the  Saxons^,  as  fee  aft,  (haft  ;fceamy 
fhame  •>  feed,  fhall.  What  was  the  pro 
nunciation  of  fc  cannot  be  determined  ; 
but  it  is  evident  that  each  letter  had  a  dif- 
tinft  found.  It  is  mofl  probable  that  be 
fore  a,  o,  and  u,fc  were  pronounced^,  or 
c  might  have  had  the  force  of  ch  in  choofe. 
It  is  very  clear  that  c  had  this  found  be 
fore  e  and  /  ;  for  the  Saxon  words  in  which 
cb  now  precede  e  or  /',  were  formerly  fpelt 

with 


DISSERTATION    I.        73 

with  c  only ;  as  child  horn  the  Saxon  cild\  chill 
from  cele  •,  chink  from  cinnony  to  gape  ;  chick 
from  «Vf«.  If  therefore  c  before  e  and  /  had 
the  force  of  ch^fceaft  muft  have  been  pro- 
•  nouncedfcbeafty  which  would  ealily  be  loft- 
ened  down  and  contraded  intojhaft. 

BUT  whatever  was  the  found  ofjc  in  the 
Saxon,  the  found  derived  from  it  is  now 
fimple,  and  has  no  fingle  charafter  to  rep- 
refent  it  in  our  language  ;  for  the  proper 
founds  of  f  and  h  combined,  do  not  form 
the  found  which  we  invariably  annex  to 
Jb.  By  not  retaining  the  primitive  Saxon 
c  afteryj  we  have  probably  loft  the  pronun 
ciation  and  introduced  an  irregularity. 

IT  is  not  certain  howevA-  that  a  change 
of  the. alphabet  was  prior  to  the  change  of 
pronunciation  ;  for  the  latter  might  have 
produced  the  former.  But  the  effe6l  is 
certain  5  we  have  a  fimple  found  without 
a  proper  character,  which  is  always  an  im- 
perfeftion.* 

WE  have  therefore  in  Englifti  the  two 
founds  of  thy  the  afpirate  in  think,  and  the 
vocal  in  this,  both  of  which  are  fimple  con- 

fonant 

THIS  may  be  (applied  by  uniting  the  two  charaftersy 
and  h  in  one,  and  naming  the  combination  EJh. 


74        DISSERTATION    I. 

fonant  founds,  peculiar  to  the  language, 
and  derived  frorq.  two  Jingle  characters . 
Each  ought  ftill  to  be  reprefented  by  a  dif- 
tinft  fingle  letter.  Sh,  on  the  other  hand, 
exprefs  a  fimple  found,  derived  from  two 
feparate  Saxon  confonants,  which  muft 
have  been  originally  pronounced  as  two 
letters.  Thefe  irregularities  muft  have 
been  partly  owing  to  a  change  of  alpha 
bet* 

OTHER  irregularities  have  been  occa- 
fioned  by  an  injudicious  application  of  the 
letters  of  one  alphabet  to  the  founds  of  an 
other  language. 

THE  Roman  c  fome  writers  fuppofe  was 
hard,  like  ky  before  all  the  vowels  and  diph 
thongs.  It  certainly  was  fo  before  all  except 
e  and  /  ;  where,  there  is  reafon  to  fuppofe, 
it  had  the  found  of  ch  or  ts.  It  is  very  ev 
ident  that  it  had  not  the  found  of -fy  which 
we  now  annex  to  it  in  civil,  cellar.  When 
the  Roman  alphabet,  therefore,  took  place 
of  the  primitive  Engliih  characters,  the 
Greek  k  fhould  have  been  always  written 

before 


*  THE  Germans,  who  invented  printing,  had  not  propci 
types  for  the  two  Saxon  or  Engliih  characters  ;  they  there 
fore  made  ufe  of  th  as  a  (ubftitute  for  both,  which  defeft 
we  have  not  yet  fupplicd. 


DISSERTATION    I.        75 

before  a,  0,  u,  as  in  cat,  cord,  cup  ;  and  / 
before  e  and  /.  Or  c  fhould  have  been, 
called  ke,  limited  to  one  found,  and  always 
ufed  inftead  of  k.  If  our  anceftors  had  re 
tained  the  Roman  pronunciation  of  c  be 
fore  r~and  /,  they  would  probably  have 
fpelt  cera,  civilis,  chera,  chivilis*  ch  having 
its  Englifh  found  of  tfh,  as  in  charm.  But 
if  they  pronounced  thefe  words  as  we  do, 
they  fhould  have  fubftituted/  fera.Jivilis. 
In  fhdrt,  they  fhould  have  limited  every 
charafter  to  one  found  ;  in  which  cafe,  one 
of  the  three  letters,  <?,  £,y,  would  have  been 
entirely  omitted  as  ufelefs.  This  would 
have  delivered  us  from  a  large  clafs  of  dif 
ficulties. 

WHETHER  the  ph  and  chy  in  Greek  de 
rivatives,  were  originally  introduced  into 
Englifh,  becaufe  our  anceftors  preferved 
the  afpirate ;  or  whether  the  h  was  retain 
ed  merely  to  fhow  the  etymology  of  words, 
it  is  not  eafy  to  decide.  The  probability 
is,  that  thefe  letters  were  never  afpirated 
in  Englifh,  but  that  ph  has  ever  been  pro 
nounced/,  and  ch  generally  k  ;  as  in  Phil 
ip,  chorus.  It  is  probable  however  that  the 
Romans,  from  whom  the  Englifh  borrow 
ed  their  characters,  preferved  the  afpirate; 

for 

*  Or  tfera,  tjimlis. 


76        DISSERTATION    I. 

for  they  very  fcrupuloufly  retained  the  h 
after  p  and  c ;  and  they  attempted  to  copy 
exactly  the  Greek  pronunciation.*  They 
borrowed  all  words  in  pby  ch  and  th  from 
the  Greeks.  We  have  preferred  the  char- 
afters,  but  have  moftly  loft  the  afpirate  ; 
fb  has  invariably  the  found  of  f ;  ch,  in 
Greek  derivatives,  generally  that  of  k ;  and 
th  has  become  the  reprefentative  of  two 
fimple  confonants.  With  this  change  of 
pronunciation,  the  orthography  fhould 
have  changed  ;  philofophy  fhould  now  be 
written  filofofy  ;  and  chorus^  korus  -,  th  might 
become  a  fingle  character  and  be  called 
Etb.  [F] 

BUT  it  was  the  fate  of  our  language  to 
be  fhaken  by  violent  revolutions,  and  aban 
doned  to  accident  or  the  caprice  of  un- 
Ikillful  heads.     The  operation  of  imper 
ceptible 

*  «  EUNDEM  olim  (ph)  fonum  habuiffe  ac/infcriptiones 
vqteres  confirmant,  in  quibus  alterum  pro  altero  promifcue 
adhiberi  cernimus  :  ut  phidelis"  (pro  fidelis.) Middle- 
ton  de  Lat.  Liter.  Pron.  Dif. 

OUR  letter/  has  fome  degree  of  afpiration  in  its  found  ; 
but  had  its  orginal  Roman  found  been  precifely  that  of  the 
Greek  $>  phi,  it  is  probable  that/  would  have  been  whol 
ly  ufed  in  derivatives  where  the  phi  occurred.  I  fufpeft 
that  ph  in  Latin  mufl  have  been  originally  more  ftrongly 
afpirated  than/;  but  the  tranfition  from  the  found  of  the 
one  to  that  of  the  other  was  eafy,and  the  diftinftion  was  grad 
ually  loft. 


DISSERTATION    I.        77 

ceptible  caufes,  common  to  all  languages, 
in  all  ages,  has  alfo  been  gradually  chang 
ing  the  fpelling  and  pronunciation. 

IN  Chaucer's  time,  the  infinitive  mode 
and  plural  number  of  verbs,  in  the  prefent 
tenfe,  ended  often  in  en  -y  as  loven,  for  to 
love  or  they  love.  But  loveth  was  fome- 
times  ufed  in  the  plural,  and  n  began  to  be 
omitted  in  the  infinitive.  The  French 
termination  ejje,  as  in  Goddeffe,  richeffe,  was 
ufed,  and  the  final  e  was  often  pronounced. 
The  plural  number  of  nouns  ufually  end 
ed  in  esy  as  houndes  ;  and  in  the  fame  man 
ner  terminated  the  genitive  cafe.  Nouns 
now  ending  in  y,  ended  then  in  ie,  asjlorie  •> 
y  was  ftill  prefixed  to  participles,  as  ybent ; 
and  y  was  often  ufed  where  we  now  write 
g,  as  yeve  for  give. 

FROM  that  period  the  orthography  was 
ftill  varying,  at  leaft  in  fome  particulars, 
till  the  beginning  of  the  prefent  centu 
ry.  The  group  of  eminent  writers  who 
were  cotemporary  with  Swift,  gave  great 
ftability  to  the  fpelling  ;  yet  fome  good  au 
thorities  differ  from  them  in  feveral  points. 
Johnfon,  who  has  been  ufually  followed  by 
fucceeding  compilers  of  dictionaries,  pre- 
ferves  the  u  in  honour,  favour,  and  fimilar 

words  ; 


78        DISSERTATION    L 

words  ;  as  alfo  the  final  k  in  publick,  &c< 
Afh,  followed  by  many  writers,  very  prop 
erly  reftores  thefe  words  to  the  Roman  fpell- 
ing,  by  omitting  the  u  and  k.  Excepting 
thefe  particulars,  the  orthography  of  our 
language  is  nearly  fixed. 

THE  pronunciation  has  been  neglefted 
till  a  few  years  ago  ;  when  Sheridan  and 
Kenrick,  with  feveral  compilers  of  lefs  note, 
attempted  to  give  us  a  ftandard.  Unluck 
ily  they  have  all  made  the  attempt  on 
falfe  principles  ;  and  will,  if  followed, 
multiply  the  anomalies,  which  already 
deform  the  language  and  embarrafs  the 
learner.* 

THE  language,  is  compofed  of  a  va 
riety  of  materials,  and  it  requires  fome 
labor  to  adjufl  the  parts  and  reduce  them 
to  order. 

To  accomplifh  this  purpofe,  we  muft 
fearch  for  fuch  principles  of  analogy  as 
ftill  exift  in  its  conftruftion,  and  make 
them  the  pillars  of  a  regular  fyftem .  Where 
fuch  principles  cannot  be  found,  let  us 

examin 

*  WE  may  except  Kenrick,  who  has  paid  fome  regard  to 
principles,  in  marking  the  pronunciation, 

1 


DISSERTATION    L 


79 


examin  the  opinions  of  the  learned,  and 
the  practice  of  the  nations  which  fpeak 
the  pure  Englifh,  that  we  may  determine 
by  the  weight  of  authority,  the  common  law 
of  language,  thofe  queftions  which  do  not 
come  within  any  eftablifhed  rules, 


DISSERTATION 


DISSERTATION     L 


(y/A?  Engtijh  Alphabet.—  Rules  kf  Pronun 
ciation*  —  -Differences  of  Pronunciation  and 
controverted  Points  examined. 


Oftbe  ENGLISH  ALPHABET. 

ROM  a  general  hiftory  of 
the  Enghfh  language,  and 
fome  remarks  upon  that 
fubjeft,  I  proceed  to  exam- 
in  its  elements,  or  the  pow 
ers  of  the  letters  which 
compofe  our  alphabet* 

THERE  are  in  Engliili,  twenty  five  char- 
afters  or  letters  which  are  the  reprefenta- 
tives  of  certain  founds,  either  fimple  or 
combined  ;  a,  b,  c,  d,  e,  f,  g,  i,  j,  k,  1,  m, 
n,  o,  p,  q,  r,  f,  t,  u,  v,  w,  x,  y,  z.  The 
Englifh  have  alfo  the  character  £,  which 
E  marks 


82        DISSERTATION    IL 

marks  an  afpiration  or  ftrong  breathing 
but  has  very  little  found  of  its  own.  [G] 

LETTERS,  according  to  the  founds  they 
represent,  or  the  purpofes  they  ferve,  are 
very  naturally  divided  into  three  kinds  > 
vowels,  dipthongs,  and  confonantt. 

IN  order  to  obtain  clear  ideas  of  our 
alphabet,  let  us  attend  to  the  following 
definitions  ; 

1.  A  VOCAL  found,  formed  by  opening 
the  mouth,  and  by  a  fmgle  pofition  of  the 
organs  of  fpeech,  is  a  fimple  found  or  vow 
el.     Moft  of  the  vowels  in  Englifh  are  ca 
pable  of  being  prolonged  at  pleafure,  with 
out  varying  the  pofition  of  the  organs. 

2.  No  more  than  one  fimple  found  can 
be  formed  by  one  aperture  of  the  mouth, 
and  one  pofition  of  the  organs  of  fpeech. 
The  only  difference  that  can  be  made  with 
the  fame  pofition  of  the*  organs,  is,  to  pro 
long  and  fhorten  the  fame  found. 

3.  Two  fimple  founds,  clofely  united  in 
pronunciation,  or  following  each  other  fo 
rapidly  that  the  diftinftion  is  fcarcely  per 
ceptible,  form  a  dipthong.     In  pronoun 
cing 


DISSfektAtiON     li.         83 

ciiig  a  dipthong,  two  pofitions  of  the 
parts  of  the  mouth  are  required. 

4.  THOSE  letters  which  are  hot  marks 
of  articulate  founds,  but  reprefent  indiftinft 
founds,  formed  by  fome  contaft  of  the 
parts  of  the  mouth,  or  by  compreffing  thofe 
parts,  check  all  found,  are  denominated 
confonants. 

BY  the  firft  definition  we  afcertain  the 

number  of  vowels  in  Englifh.     In  pro- 

1431162. 

nouncing  each  of  the  letters  a,  a,  a,  e,  o,  o,  u, 
we  obferve  but  one  pofition  or  aperture  of 
the  mouth  ;  the  founds  are  therefore  fim- 
ple,  and  the  letters  are  called  vcivets.  *the 
fix  firft  founds  are  capable  of  being  pro 
longed  at  pleafure* 

BY  the  fecond  definition,  we  -determine 
which  founds  are  the  fame  in  quality,  and 
different  only  in  the  time  of  being  pro 
nounced.  Thus  /  in  Jit  has  the  fame  qual 
ity  of  found  as  €e  \i\feet,  for  both  are  pro 
nounced  with  the  fame  difpofition  of  the 
organs  ;  but  the  firft  is  the  fhorteft  artic 
ulation  of  the  found,  and  the  laft,  a  long  or 
grave  articulation.  The  other  vowels  have 
alfo  their  fhort  or  abrupt  founds  ;  a  in  late 
F  2  has 


84        DISSERTATION    II. 

has  its  fhort  found  in  let ;  a  in  cart  has 
its  fhort  found  in  carry  j  a  in  fall  has  its 
fhort  found  in  folly  \  GO  in  fool  its  fhort 
found  in  full.  O  is  fometimes  fhortened 
in  common  parlance,  as  in  coif  -,  but  the 
diftinftion  between  o  in  coal  and  colt,  feems 
to  be  accidental  or  caufed  by  the  final  con- 
fonant,  and  not  fufficiently  fettled  or  im 
portant  to  require  a  feparate  confideration, 

BY  the  third  definition  we  are  enabled 
to  afcertain  the  dipthongs  in  our  lan 
guage.  The  letters  /,  u  and  y  are  ufually 
clafled  among  the  vowels  ;  but  the  firft  or 
long  found  of  each  requires,  in  pronuncia 
tion,  two  pofitions  of  the  organs  of  fpeech, 
or  rather  a  tranfition  from  the  pofition 
neceflary  to  fcym  one  fimpl$  found,  to  the 
pofition  neceflary  to  form  another  fim- 
ple  found.  We  begin  the  found  of  /  near 
ly  with  the  fame  aperture  of  the  glottis,  as 
we  do  the  broad  a  or  aw  :  The  aperture 
however  is  not  quite  fo  great  :  We  rapidly 
clofe  the  mouth  to  the  pofition  ,where  we 
pronounce  ee,  and  there  flop  the  found. 
This  letter  is  therefore  a  dipthong.  T 
has  no  property  but  what  belongs  to  /. 

17  ALSO  is  not  ftriftly  a  vowel  ;  nor  is 
it>  as  it  is  commonly  represented,  compofed 

of 


DISSERTATION    II.        85 

of  e  and  oo.  We  do  not  begin  the  found 
in  the  pofition  necefiary  to  found  ee,  as  is 
obvious  in  the  words  falute^falubrious^  rev 
olution  ;  but  with  a  greater  aperture  of  the 
mouth  and  with  a  pofition  perfeftly  eafy 
and  natural.  From  that  pofition  we  pafs 
to  the  pofition  with  which  we  pronounce 
oo,  and  there  cloie  the  found, 

IT  muft  however  be  obferved  that  \vhen 
thefe  letters,  /',  #,  are  followed  by  a  confo- 
nant,  the  two  founds  of  the  dipthong  are 
not  clearly  diftinguifhable.  We  do  not, 
mjight,  hear  the  found  of  ee  -,  nor  the  found 
of  oo  in  cube.  The  confonant  compreffes 
the  organs  and  clofes  the  found  of  the 
word  fo  fuddenly,  that  the  ear  can  diftin- 
guifh  but  a  fimple  vocal  found  :  And  not- 
withftanding  thefe  letters  are  dipthongs, 
when  confidered  by  themfelves,  yet  in  com 
bination  with  confonants,  they  are  often 
marks  of  fimple  founds  or  vowels. 

THE  fhort  found  of  /  and  y,  is  merely 
fliort  ee.  The  found  of  u  in  tun,  is  a  fep- 
arate  vowel,  which  has  no  affinity  to  any 
other  found  in  the  language. 

THE  found  of  oi  or  oy  is  dipthongal, 
compofed  of  the  third  or  "broad  a,  and'*r. 

The 


86        DISSERTATION    It 

The  found  of  ou  or  ow  is  alfo  dipthonga}, 
compounded  of  third  a  and  oo.  The  found 
however  does  not  require  quite  fq  great  an 
aperture  of  the  mouth  as  broad  a ;  the  por 
fition  13  more  natural,  3nd  the  articulation 
requires  lef§  exertion. 

THE  union  of  a  and  w  in  law,  has  beeu 
very  erroneoafly  confidered  a  dipthong. 
Whatever  might  have  been  the  ancient 
pronunciation  pf  thefe  letters  (and  it  is 
probable  that  good  reafons  operated  to 
produce  their  union)  they  now  exhibit  but 
one  fimple  vocal  found.  The  fame  may 
be  obferved  of  ee,  oo,  au,  at,  cp,  ei,  ie,  eoy  oa, 
and  perhaps  fome  other  combinations,  each 
pf  which  aftually  exhibits  the  found  of  one 
letter  qnly,  which  found  is  as  ftmpls  as  that 
of  a  or  <?.* 

UNDER  the  head  of  dipthongs  we  may 
perhaps;  range  tva,  we,  wo,  wi,  &c.  flPh^s 
nearly  the  fhort  found  of  oo ;  for  will,  dwell 
are  pronounced  as  if  written  ooill,  dooell. 
It  is  a  controverted  point,  whether  w  fhould 
be  claffed  with  the  vowels  or  confonants. 
I  fhall  only  qbferve,  that  it  is  prpnounced 
by  opening  the  mouth,  without  a  conta£l 

of 

*  DR.  Sheridan  has  coined  a,  word  for  the fe  combrna- 
;  he  calls  them  digraph^  that  is,  double  written* 


DISSERTATION    II.        87 

of  the  parts  ;  altho,  in  a  rapid  pronuncia 
tion,  it  approaches  to  a  conionant.  [I]  It 
is  however  very  immaterial,  whether  we 
clafs  it  with  the  vowels  or  confonants; 
as  all  grammarians  agree  that  its  found  is 
that  of  oo  fhprt.  It  ought  to  be  named  co 
or  we ;  which  would  fave  children  much  of 
the  trouble  they  now  experience,  in  learn 
ing  its  proper  found  from  that  awkward 
name  double  u. 

THE  found  of  y  in  the  beginning  of 
words,  is,  by  fome  wrriters,  called  a  vowel, 
but  by  moft  of  them  a  confonant.  Lowth 
has  aflerted,  that  it  has  every  property  of  a 
vowel  and  not  one  of  a  conionant.  Sher 
idan  confiders^y  in  youth,  year,  &c.  as  the 
fhort  ee.  But  if  thefe  writers  would  at 
tend  to  the  manner  in  which  we  pronounce 
yts,  ye,  they  would  acknowlege  that  y  has 
ibme  property  different  from  ee  ;  for  it  is 
very  evident  that  they  are  not  pronounced 
ee-es,  ee-e.  The  fact  is,  that  in  the  American 
pronunciation  of  y,  the  root  of  the  tongue 
is  prefled  againft  the  upper  part  of  the 
mouth,  above  the  palate,  more  clofely  than 
it  is  in  pronouncing  eey  and  not  fo  clolely 
3s  in  pronouncing  g  hard.  The  trar  fition 
however  from  y  to  ee  or  to  g,  is  extremely 
eafy,  and  hence  the  miftake  that  y  is  fhort 

ee. 


88        DISSERTATION    II. 

«?,  as  alfo  the  convertibility  of  y  with^.  [  J] 
Jt  appears  to  me  thatjy  in  the  beginning 
of  words,  is  more  clearly  a  confonant  than  i#, 

IN  many  words,  i  has  the  power  of  y 
confonant  V  particularly  after  /  and  n  \  as 
Jilt  a^  union. 

Ji  \  -        • 

THE  vowels  therefore  in  Englifh  are 
all  heard  in  the  following  words  -,  late, 
half,  hall,  feet,  pool,  note,  tun,  fight,  truth, 
The  five  firft  have  fhort  founds  or  dupli 
cates,  which  may  be  heard  in  let,  hat,  hot, 
fit,  pull  ;  and  the  letters  /  and  u  are  but 
accidentally  vowels.  The  pure  primitive 
vowels  in  Englilh  are  therefore  feven. 

THE  dipthdngs  may  be  heard  in  the 
following  words  ;  lie  or  defy,  due,  voice  or 
joy,  round  or  now.  To  thefe  we  may  add 
ua  in  perfudde  ;  and  perhaps  the  combina 
tions  of  w  and  the  vowels,  in  tyell,  will, 
&c. 


THE  confonants  in  Englifh  are 
teen  ;  but  for  want  of  proper  charafters> 
five  of  them  are  expreffed  or  marked  by 
double  letters.  We  annex  two  founds  to 
th  ;  one  tojh  ;  one  to  ng  ;  and  one  lojl  or 
Jity  as  may  be  heard  in  the  following  words  $  ' 


DISSERTATION    II.        89 

think,  this,  fhall,  bring,  confufion  or 
plealure.  Thefe  characters  fhould  be  call 
ed,  etb,  e/h,  eng,  ezh  ;  and  th  fhould 
have  two  names,  the  afpirate  as  in  tbink^ 
and  the  vocal  as  in  this  ;  the  latter  found 
might  be  diftinguiftied  by  a  fmall  mark 
drdwn  thro  'th.  This  improvement  is  fo 
obvious  and  eafy,  and  would  be  fo  con 
venient  for  the  learners  of  the  language, 
that  I  muft  believe  it  will  foon  be  intro 
duced. 

THE  confonants  may  be  divided  into 
wutes  zn&femieuGfwels.  When  a  confonant 
compreffes  the  lips,  or  the  tongue  and  roof 
of  the  mouth,  fo  clofely  as  to  check  all  found, 
it  is  called  a  perfect  mute  :  Such  are  p,  k> 
and  t,  as  may  be  perceived  by  pronouncing 
the  fyllables,  ep,  ek>  et.  When  the  com- 
preffion  of  the  organs  is  more  gentle  and 
does  not  flop  all  iound  immediately,  the 
letters  are  called  mutes  -3  fuch  are  b,  d>  and 
g,  as  may  be  perceived  by  pronouncing  the 
fyllables,  eb,  ed*>  eg.  V/hen  a  confonant 
has  an  imperfeft  found,  or  hiffing,  which 
may  be  continued,  after  a-  contaft  of  the 
organs,  it  is  denominated  a  femivowel. 
Of  this  kind  are  ef,  el,  em,  en,  er,  es,  ev, 
ez,  eth,*  eth,*  efh,  ezh,  ing.  Of  thefe,  four 

arc 

and  afpirate. 


90        DISSERTATION    II. 

are  afpJrates,  ef,  es,  eth,  and  efti.    The  oth 
ers  are  vocal,  having  an  imperfeft  found. 

THE  whole  may  be  thus  arranged. 

Perfe£l  mutes p,  k,  t. 

Mutes b,  d,  g. 

vocal,      1 1,  m,  n,  r,  v,  z,  th, 
Semivowels — -  5-      zb,ng, 

afpirate,  J  f,  f,  th,  ih. 

THEY  may  alfo  be  claffed  according  to 
the  manner  in  which  they  are  formed  by 
the  organs  :  Thus,  thofe  formed 
By  the  lips,  are  called  labials — b,  p,  f,  v. 
By  the  teeth,  are  called  dentals-*-d,  t,  th,  z,  f, 

fh,zh. 

By  the  palate,, are  called  palatine — g,  k,  1,  r. 
By  the  nofe,  are  called  nafal — m,  n,  ng. 

ON  the  fubjeft  of  the  alphabet,  I  have 
this  remark  further  ;  that  for  want  of  a 
proper  knowlege  of  the  powers  of  Jh  and 
thy  fome  material  errors  in  printing  have 
obtained  in  common  practice.  Sh  are  u- 
fually  united  in  printing,  and  generally 
with  propriety,  for  the  combination  repre- 
fents  a  fimple  confonant.  But  in  feveral 
compound  words/  and  b  have  been  im 
properly  united,  where  one  is  filent  or 
where  each  retains  its  own  power,  as  in, 

dishonqr, 


DISSERTATION    II,        9> 

Dishonor,  dishoneft,  dishabille,  hogs 
head,  houfehold,  falfehood,  and  fomc 
others.  The  union  of  Jh  in  thefc  words, 
is  embarraffing,  efpecially  to  children,  who 
are  led  to  pronounce  them  dtjh-onory  difo- 
enejl.  This  error  ftill  prevails  in  printing, 
except  in  the  laft  mentioned  word,  which 
is  fbmetimes  corre&ly  printed  falfehood. 

TH,  tho  not  united  in  character,  have  a 
tendency  to  produce,  in  fome  words,  a 
wrong  pronunciation.  For  inftance,  we 
are  very  apt  to  fay  Wren-tham  inftead  of 
Wrent-ham.  Hotham  is  alfo  ambiguous  ; 
there  is  nothing  in  the  orthography  to  di- 
reft  us,  whether  to  pronounce  it.  Hot-bam 
or  Ho-thamy  altho  cuftqm  decides  in  favor 
pf  the  latter. 

THESE  remarks  fhow  the  propriety  of 
attending  to  our  orthography,  and  of  at 
tempting  to  remove  caufes  of  error,  when 
it  can  be  done  without  much  trouble  or 
danger  of  giving  oifence, 

RULES  */ PRONUNCIATION. 

HAVING  briefly  explained  the  Englifli 
alphabet,  I  proceed  to  the  rules  of  pronun 
ciation, 

IN 


92        DISSERTATION    II. 

IN  pronunciation,  two  things  demand 
our  notice  -y  the  proper  founds  of  the  vow 
els  and  confonants,  and  the  accent. 

IN  pronouncing  both  vowels  and  confo- 
nants,  the  general  rule  is,  thatfimilar  com- 
binaiions  of  letters  Jhould  be  pronounced  alike, 
except  'when  general  cujiom  has  decided  other- 
wife.  Thus  if  /  in  the  words,  bind)  find, 
mind)  has  its  firft  found,  it  ought  to  have 
the  fame  found  in  other  fimilar  combina 
tions,  kind)  blind)  grind.  This  is  the  rule 
of  analogy r,  the  great  leading  principle  that 
fhould  regulate  the  conftrudtion  of  all  lan 
guages.  But  as  languages  are  not  formed 
at  once  by  fyftem,  and  are  ever  expofed  to 
changes,  it  muft  necefTarily  happen  that 
there  will  be  in  all  languages,  fome  ex 
ceptions  from  any  general  rule ;  fome  de 
partures  from  ths  principle  of  uniformity, 

THE  pra£Uce  of  a  nation,  when  univer- 
fal  or  ancient,  has,  in  moil  cafes,  the  force 
and  authority  of  law  \  it  implies  mutual  and 
general  confent,  and  becomes  a  rule  of 
propriety.  On  this  ground,  fome  devia 
tions  from  the  analogy  of  conftruftion  and 
pronunciation  muft  be  admitted  in  all 
languages.  Thus  from  the  analogy  al 
ready  mentioned,  w/Wis  an  exception ;  for 

general 


DISSERTATION    II,        93 

general  pra6lice  has  determined  that  / 
fhould,  in  this ,  word,  have  its  fecond  or 
fhort  found.*  Whether  this  deviation  was 
admitted  at  firft  to  diftinguifh  this  word 
from  the  verb  to  wind)  or  whether  there 
were  other  good  reafons  which  cannot  now 
be  explored,  or  whether  it  was  merely  the 
work  of  ignorance  or  accident,  it  is  un~ 
neceflary  to  enquire  -y  the  common  con- 
fent  of  a  nation  is  fufficient  to  ftamp  it 
with  propriety. 

ANOTHER  rule  in  Englifh,  which  admits 
of  no  exception,  is,  when  the  accent  falls 
on  a  vowel,  it  is  long,  as  o  in  ho'-ly  ;  but 
when  the  accent  falls  on  a  confonant,  the 
preceding  vowel  is  fhort,  as  mflaf-ter. 

IT  is  alfo  a  general  rule,  that  when  a 
confonant  clofes  a  fyllable,  the  preceding 
vowel  is  fhort,  as  in  fan-cy,  habit  ;  altho 
this  rule  has  its  exceptions,  as  Cam-bridge, 
dan-gery  and  perhaps  man-ger. 

FROM  this  rule,  the  Englifh  except  alfo 

angel,  ancient.     In  this  all  the  ftandard  au 
thors 

*  ON  the  ftage,  it  is  fometimes  pronounced  with  i  long, 
either  for  the  fake  of  rhime,  or  in  order  to  be  heard.  Mr, 
Sheridan  marks  it  both  ways  ;  yet  in  common  difcourfc  h<5 
it  with  i  foort,  as  do  the  nation  in  general. 


94        DISSERTATION    II; 

thors  agree,  except  Kenrick  arid  Burn,' 
Who  mark  a  in  ancient  both  lorig  and  fhort. 
The  Englifh  pronunciation  is  followed  in 
the  middle  and  fouthern  ftates;  but  the 
eaftern  univerfities  have  reftored  thefe  words 
to  the  analogy  of  the  language,  and  give 
a  its  fecond  found.  It  is  prefumed  that  no 
reafon  can  be  given  for  making  thefe  words 
exceptions  to  the  general  rule,  but  prac 
tice  ;  and  this  is  far  from  being  univerfal, 
there  being  many  of  the  beft  fpeakers  in 
America,  who  give  a,  in  the  words  men 
tioned,  the  fame  found  as  in  anguijh,  annals, 
angelic,  antiquity. 

THE  praftice  of  the  eaftern  univerfities 
therefore  fhould  be  encouraged,  rather  than 
difcountenanced ;  as  it  diminifhes  the  num 
ber  of  anomalies.  I  fhall  only  remark  fur 
ther,  that  a  in  thefe  words  muft  formerly 
have  had  its  third  or  fourth  found  ;  which 
is  evident  from  the  old  orthography  ;  for 
angel,  at  leaft,  was  fpelt  like  grant,  com 
mand,  &C.  aungel,  graunt,  commaund.  In 
giving  a  its  firft  found  therefore,  the  mod 
ern  Engliili  have  not  only  infringed  the 
rule  of  analogy,  but  have  deviated  from 
former  praftice. 

IN  the  word  chamber,  a  has  its  fourth 
found.  It  is  neceflary  to  remark  this  ;  as 

there 


DISSERTATION    II.        95 

thefe  are  many  people  in  America,  who 
give  a  its  firft  found,  which  is  contrary  to 
analogy  and  to  all  the  Englifh  authorities. 

WITH  regard  to  accent,  that  particular 
ftrefsof  voice  which  fliguld  diftinguifh  fome 
fyllable  of  a  word  from  others,  three  things 
are  to  be  confidered  ;  the  importance  of 
the  fyllable  ;•  the  derivation  of  the  word  ; 
and  the  terminating  fyllable. 

THE  importance  of  a  fyllable  is  difcov- 
ered  by  refolving  a  word  into  the  parts 
which  compofe  it,  or  reducing  it  to  its 
radicals.  Thus  fenfible  is  derived  from 
fenfus  in  Latin  or  Jenje  in  Englifh.  The 
firft  fyllable  therefore  is  that  on  which  the 
meaning  of  the  word  principally  depends  ; 
the  others  being  an  acceflary  termination. 

THE  firft  fyllable  then  is  the  moft  im 
portant  and  requires  the  accent.  For  the 
fame  reafon,  admire,  compare,  deflrcy^  &c. 
have  the  accent  on  the  fecond  fyllable  in 
preference  to  the  firft  5  the  laft  fyllables 
being  all  derived  from  verbs,  and  the  firft 
being  mere  particles.* 

ANOTHER 

*  The  moft  fignificant  words,  and  confequcntly  the  moO: 
important,  are  nouns  and  verbs ;  then  follow  adje&ivcs, 
pronouns,  auxiliary  verbs  and  participles, — Particles  are  the 
Icaft.  important. 


96        DISSERTATION    It 

ANOTHER  rule  for  laying  tfie  accent  of 
words  arifes  from  derivation.  Thus  all 
words  that  take  the  terminations  wg,fal> 
lefs>  nefs,  ed,  eft,  ijl,  ly,  retain  the  accent  on 
the  fyllable  where  it  is  laid  in  their  primi 
tives;  as  proceed^  proceeding^  wonder ;  wonder* 
ful,  &c. 

BUT  the  moft  important  article  to  be 
confidered  in  the  accentuation  of  words,  is 
the  terminating  fyllable.  From  the  differ 
ent  terminations  of  words  arife  various  a- 
nalogies,  the  rnoft  of  which  are  enumerat 
ed  in  the  firft  part  of  my  Inftitute.  The 
principle  which  has  operated  to  produce 
thefe  analogies,  is  the  eafe  of  fpeaking  or 
the  harmony  of  enunciation.  Confequent- 
ly  this  principle  muft  take  place  of  all  oth 
ers  ;  and  we  find  that  it  frequently  inter 
feres  with  the  two  foregoing  rules,  and  reg 
ulates  pra£tice  in  oppofition  to  both. 

THE  general  rule,  grounded  on  this 
principle,  is,  that  words,  having  the  fame 
terminating  fyllable,  have  the  accent  at  the 
fame  diftance  from  that  termination.  Thus 
all  words  ending  in  tion,  fan,  don,  cial, 
dan,  have  the  accent  on  the  laft  fyllable 
but  one  ;*  and  this  without  any  regard  to 

derivation 

*  I  CONSIDER  fliefe  terminations  as  Tingle  fyllabl«3. 


II. 


derivation  or  to  the  number  of  fyllables  in 
the  word. 

THUS  moft  words  in  ty,  if  they  confift 
of  more  fyllabtes  than  two,  have  the  ac 
cent  on  the  antepenult  ;  as  probity,  abfurd- 
ity,  probability.  I  recolleft  but  t\vo  excep 
tions,  viz.  commonalty  y  admiralty  ;  the  accent 
of  which  is  laid  upon  the  firft  fyllable,  as 
in  their  primitives.* 

BUT  let  us  obferve  the  force  of  the  laft 
rule,  in  oppofition  to  the  others.  Mortal 
has  the  accent  on  the  firft  fyllable.  Here 
the  firft  rule  takes  place,  for  the  firft  fylla 
ble,  having  mors,  death,  for  its  root,  is  the 
moft  important.  But  the  derivative,  mor 
tality  ',  conforms  to  the  analogy  of  words 
ending  in  ty  and  has  the  accent  on  the  laft 
fyllable  but  two.  That  the  eafe  or  har 
mony  of  pronunciation,  is  the  caufe  of  this 
change  of  accent,  will  be  evident  to  any 
perfon  who  fhall  attempt  to  pronounce 
words  of  this  clafs,  with  the  accent  on  any 
other  fyllable  than  the  antepenult. 

MOST 


*  Such  is  the  tendency  of  people  to  uniformity,  that  the 
commonalty ,  for  the  moft  part,  form  the  word  regularly,  and 
pronounce  it  commonality.  Analogy  requires  that  both  theie 
words  fhould  end  in  ity  ;  but  cultcm.  has  eflablifhed  them 
as  exceptions, 

G 


98        DISSERTATION    II, 

MOST  of  thefe  rules  admit  a  few  excep 
tions  >  which  are  to  be  learnt  by  prafticc. 
Cuftom  has  made  fome  inroads  upon  the 
rules  of  uniformity,  and  caprice  is  ever 
bufy  in  multiplying  anomalies.  Still,  rules 
will  be  of  great  fervice  in  ,afcer  taming  and 
fixing  our  language  $  for  tho  they  may  not 
root  out  old  errors,  they  may  prevent  the 
introduction  of  others. 

BUT  befides  the  principal  accent,  there 
is,  in  moft  polyfyllables,  an  inferior  accent 
laid  on  the  third  or  fourth  fyllable  from 
the  principal.  Indeed  in  fome  words,  the 
two  accents  are  fo  nearly  equal,  as  to  be 
fcarcely  diftinguifhable. 

IT  is  denied  by  fome  critics  that  there 
are  more  accents  than  one,  in  any  word. 
But  the  compofition  of  words,  and  the  eafe 
of  fpeaking,  both  require  a  plurality  of 
accent  in  a  very  great  number  of  inllances ; 
and  our  ears  inform  us  that  fuch  a  plu 
rality  aftually  exifts  in  pra&ice.  If  a  man 
will  aflert  that  in  fuch  words  as  defegnation, 
exaltation^  there  is  but  one  fyllable  diftin- 
guifhed  from  the  others  by  a  fuperior  ftrefs 
of  voice,  he  muft  deny  the  evidence  of 
fenfe,  and  would  not  liften  to  argument. 

I    MUST 


DISSERTATION    II.        99 

I  MUST  however  remark  that  moft,  if 
not  all  fyllables,  derived  from  fome  impor 
tant  word,  have  fome  degree  of  accent  :* 
So  that  in  compounds,  there  are  ufually  as 
many  accents  as  radicals.  Thus  mfan&i-* 
fy,  which  is  compofed  of  two  radicals, 
fantfus  and  fa,  we  obferve  two  accents  ; 
the  ftrongeft  on  the  firft  fyllable.  The 
fame  may  be  obferved  in  magnanimity,  from 
magnus  and  animus  ;  in  promogeniture,  &c. 
except  that  in  thefe  the  principal  accent  is 
on  the  third  fyllable. 

NOTWITHSTANDING  it  is  a  general  rule, 
that  there  are  as  many  accents  in  a  word, 
as  radicals,  yet  one  of  them  at  leaft  is  fre 
quently  removed  from  the  principal  fylla 
ble,  by  the  analogy  of  termination,  which 
prevails  over  all  other  reafons.  Thus  in 
mathematics,  the  two  accents  lie  on  the 
proper  fyllables ;  but  in  mathematician,  the 
laft  accent  is  removed  to  a  lefs  important 
place.  In  imperceptible,  the  principal  ac 
cent, 

*FROM  this  remark  we  mud  except  fome  derivatives 
from  the  Greek  ;  as  geography,  philology,  antithefis,  hy- 
pothefis,  &c.  which  have  but  one  accent.  Etymology  re 
quires  thefe  words  to  be  accented  on  the  firft  and  third  fyHa* 
bles  ;  but  the  genius  of  the  language,  or  the  analogy  of  termi 
nation  has  prevailed  over  etymological  reafons.  Etymology 
however  refumes  her  rights  in  the  derivatives*  geaoraphifal, 
philological,,  &c,  where  each  radical  fyllable  is  diitmgwfhed 
oy  an  accent, 

Gz 


loo      DISSERTATION    It 

cent,  with  propriety,  lies  on  the  third  fylla- 
ble,  which  being  derived  from  a  verb  (ca- 
fio)  is  the  moft  important.  The  particle 
//»,  being  the  privative,  or  that  fyllable 
which  changes  the  meaning  of  the  whole 
word  from  affirmative  to  negative,  becomes 
important  and  has  fome  degree  of  accent. 
But  in  the  derivative  imperceptibility,  while 
the  firft:  and  third  fyllables  retain  an  accent, 
the  analogy  of  termination  carries  the  prin 
cipal  accent  to  the  fifth  fyllable,  which  is 
adventitious  and  lefs  important  than  the 
others.* 

IN  many  compounds,  as,  earth-quake, 
rain-bowy  each  fyllable  is  pronounced  with 
the  ftrefs  that  belongs  to  accented  fyllables ; 
and  there  is  little  or  no  diftinftion  of  ac 
cent.  The  reafon  is  obvious  :  There  is 
no  difference  in  the  importance  of  the  fyl 
lables  ;  both  are  equally  neceflary  to  con 
vey  the  idea.  By  giving  one  fyllable  the 

whole 


*  To  prove  the  utility  of  accent  in  marking  the  fignifica- 
tion  of  words,  it  is  only  neceffary  to  advert  to  the  two 
words  omiffton  and  commiffion.  Thefe  words  have  the  ac 
cent  on  the  iecond  lyllable  ;  but  when  we  ufe  them  by  way 
of  contrail,  we  lay  a  ftrong  accent  on  the  firft  iyllable  of 
each,  by  which  the  oppofition  of  fenie  is  diitinguifhed. 
«'  Sins  of  o'  million  and  com7 million."  Thus  when  we  uie 
the  word  re^ain^  we  often  lay  an  accent  on  re  almorl  equal 
to  that  on  gain  ;  becaufe  the  fenfe  of  the  word  depend* 
much,  or  rather  wholly,  on  the  particle* 


DISSERTATION    II.       ior 

whok  accent,  fuch  a  word  lofes  its  original 
meaning,  or  at  leaft  its  force,  as  may  be 
obferved  in  the  word  huffy,  a  corruption  of 
houfe-<wife  5  which,  from  an  affectation  of  a 
unity  of  accent,  and  a  hafty  pronunciation, 
has  funk  into  a  low  word.  From  the  fame 
ridiculous  affeftation,  ivork-houfe  is,  by  fome 
people,  pronounced  work-us. 

,  ON  this  head,  I  {hall  only  obferve  fur 
ther,  that  fome  words  of  many  fyllables 
have  three  accents  -,  of  which  we  have  aq. 
example  in  vatttddina'rian. 

IT  has  been  already  remarked  "that  the 
compofition  of  words,  and  the  eafe  of 
fpeaking,  require  a  plurality  of  accent. 
The  reafon  why  words  of  many  fyllables 
have  two  or  three  accents,  is  plain  to  any 
man  that  attempts  to  pronounce  them 
without  an  accent, 

WE  cannot  pronounce  more  than  two 
unaccented  fyllables  with  perfect  eafe ;  but 
four  or  five  can  hardly  be  articulated  with 
out  an  intervening  accent.  We  glide  over 
the  unaccented  fyllables  with  fuch  rapid 
ity,  that  we  have  hardly  time  to  place  the 
organs  in  a  pofition  to  articulate  them. 
The  difficulty  is  in  proportion  to  the  num.- 
G  7  ber  : 


102      DISSERTATION    II. 

ber  :  So  that  after  pafling  over  two  or 
three,  the  voice  very  naturally  refts  or  falls 
forceably  upon  a  particular  fyllable.  Hence 
the  words  moil  difficult  to  be  pronounced, 
are  thole  of  four  fyllables,  accented  on  the 
firft  ;  as  figurative,  literature,  applicable. 
The  difficulty  is  very  great,  when  the 
middle  fyllables  abound  with  confonants, 
evep.  in  triffyllables,  as  aggrandize  5  but  is 
itfelf  a  fufficient  reafon  For  not  accenting 
the  firft  fyllable  of  fuch  words  as  accepta 
ble  and  -r*fra£tory.  When  one  of  the 
words  which  have  the  accent  on  the  firft, 
and  three  fucceeding  unaccented  fyllables, 
is '  followed  By*  two  or  three  particles,  the 
pafiage  is  weak  and  often  occafions  hefita- 
tion  in  a  fpeaker  ;  as  "  applicable  to  the  af- 
fairs  of  common  life/' 

A  REMARKABLE  inftance  of  this,  we 
find  in  Prieftley's  Preface  to  Letters  to  a 
Philofophical  Unbeliever  ;  "  Whether  of  a 
phzfureable  or  of  a  painful  nature."  In 
this  example  there  are  fix  weak  fyllables 
following  each  other  without  interruption, 
and  fuch  paffagcs  are  not  reduceable  to  any 
kind  of  poetic  feet.  This  affejnblage  of 
unimportant  fyllables  makes  a  hiatus  in 
language,  which  fhould,  as  far  as  poffible, 
be  avoided  by  a  writer ;  for  the  melody  of 

prole 


DISSERTATION    II.       103 

profe  confifts  in  a  proper  mixture  of  im 
portant  and  unimportant  fy!lables.*[K] 


DIFFERENCES  of  PRONUNCIATION 
W  CONTROVERTED  POINTS  EX 
AMINED. 

HAVING  laid  down  fome  general  rules 
refpe£ling  pronunciation,  I  proceed  to  ex- 
amin  local  differences,  and  the  moft  mate 
rial  points  of  controverfy  on  this  fubjeft. 

IN  the  caftern  ftates,  there  is  a  pra&ice 
prevailing  among  the  body  of  the  people, 
of  prolonging  the  found  of  /  in  the  termi 
nation  ive.  In  fuch  words  as  motive,  rela- 
five,  &c.  the  people,  excepting  the  more 
polifhed  part,  give  i  its  firft  found.  This 
is  a  local  practice,  oppofed  to  the  general 

pronunciation 

*  IN  the  following  paffage,  alliteration  or  the  fimilarity 
of  the  weak  fyllables,  has  a  very  bad  effeft.  "  We  tread, 
as  within  an  enchanted  circle,  where  nothing  appears  as  it 
truly  is."  -  Blair  Serm.  9. 

ADIFFICULTY  of  pronunciation  is  obvious  in  the  fol 
lowing  fentence,  "  This  caution  while  it  admirably  protects 
the  public  liberty,  can  never  bear  hard  upon  individuals." 
Change  the  accent  from  the  firft  to  the"  iccond  lyllable  of 
ly  and  the  difficulty  vanifhes. 


44  AND  yet  the  labyrinth  is  more  adininwU  than  tht  Py- 
ramids."—  Tranf.  of  Herodotus,  Euterpe, 


DISSERTATION    II. 


pronunciation  of  the  Englifh  on  both  fides 
of  the  atlantic,  fometimes  to  the  rules  of  ac 
cent,  and  always  to  derivation.  In'diflyl^ 
lables,  as  motive,  affive,  the  genius  of  our 
language  requires  that  the  accent  {hould 
be  laid  on  one  fyllable,  and  that  the  other 
fhould  be  fhort.*  But  by  prolonging  /  in 
the  laft,  the  diftinftlon  of  accent  is  total 
ly  deftroyed. 

IN  polyfyllables,  which  often  have  two 
accents,  this  reafon  has  lefs  force,  but  ths 
derivation,  which  is  from  the  French  mo 
tif,  relatif\  always  requires  that  i  in  the 
termination  we  fhould  have  the  found  of 
ee  fhort,  as  in  live,  give.  This  is  merely 
the  fhort  Ibund  of  the  French  /,  and  the 
confequence  of  the  Engiifh  accent  on  the 
firft  fyllable,  Thefe  reafons,  with  the  an-* 
thority  of  the  moft  approved  practice, 
fhould  operate  to  difcountenance  the  fin- 
gular  drawling  pronunciation  of  the  cart- 
era  people.-f-  THE 

*  EXCEPT  compounds,  as  earthquake,  boohafe. 

•f  THE  final  e  mufl  be  confidered  as  the  caufe  of  this  vul 
gar  dialeft.  It  is  wifhecl  that  ibmc  bold  genius  would  dare 
to  be  right,  and  fpcll  this  clafs  of  words  without  e,  motiv. 
By  reafon  of  an  embarrafling  orthography?  one  half  the 
trouble  of  learning  Englifh,  is  beflowed  in  acquiring  errors, 
and  correcting  them  after  they  are  formed  into  habits.  To 
prevent  the  continuance  of  this  erroneous  practice,  I  have, 
-in  the  firfl  part  of  the  Inftitute,  diflinguifhed  the  lilerit  tt  by 
an  Italic  character. 


-DISSERTATION    I.      105 

.  THE  fame  reafons  are  oppofed  to  anoth 
er  local  praftice  of  a  fimilar  nature  in  the 
middle  ftates  $  where  many  people  pro 
nounce  praftife^  prejudice -,  with  /  long.  I 
know  of  no  authority  for  this  beyond  the 
limits  of  two  or  three  ftates ;  and  it  is  clear 
that  the. practice  is  not  warranted  by  any 
principle  in  the  language, 

ANOTHER  very  common  error,  among 
the  yeomanry  of  America,  and  particularly 
in  New  England,  is  the  pronouncing  of  e 
before  ry  like  a ;  as  marcy  for  mercy.  This 
miftake  muft  have  originated  principally  in 
the  name  of  the  letter  r,  which,  in  moft  of 
our  fchool  books,  is  called  ar.  This  firtgle 
miftake  has  fpread  a  falfe  pronunciation  of 
feveral  hundred  words,  among  millions  of 
people.* 

To  avoid  this  difagreeable  fingularity 
fome  fine  fpeakers  have  run  into  another 
extreme,  by  pronouncing  e  before  r,  like  u> 
murcy.  This  is  an  error.  The  true  found 
of  the  fhort  e,  as  in  lef,  is  the  correft  and 
elegant  pronunciation  of  this  letter  in  all 
words  of  this  clafs, 

THERE 

*  To  remedy  the  evil,  in  Tome  degree,  this  letter  is  named 
er,  in  the  Inftitute.     In  a  few  inflances  this  pronunciation  ' 
is  become  general  among  polite  fpeakers,  as  clerks,  fer» 


106      DISSERTATION    II. 

THERE  is  a  vulgar  fingularity  in  the 
pronunciation  of  the  eaftern  people,  which 
is  very  incorreft,  and  difagreeable  to  ftran- 
gers ;  that  of  prefixing  the  found  of  /  fhort  or 
e>  before  the  dipthong  ow  ;  as  kio*w>  piower 
orpeower.  This  fault  ufually  occurs  after 
fy  c  hard,  or  thofe  other  confonants  which 
are  formed  near  the  feat  of  ee  in  the  mouth, 
or  in  paffing  from  which  to  the  fucceeding 
vowel,  the  organs  naturally  take  the  pofi- 
tion  neceflary  to  pronounce  ee.  But  the 
moft  awkward  countryman  pronounces 
round,  ground >  &c.  with  tolerable  propriety. 

THIS,  with  fome  other  peculiarities  which 
prevail  among  the  yeomanry  of  New  Eng 
land,  fprings  from  caufes  that  do  not  exift, 
in  the  fame  degree,  in  any  other  part  of  A- 
merica,  perhaps  not  in  the  world.  It  may 
furprize  thofe  who  have  not  turned  their 
thoughts  to  this  fubjeft,  that  I  fhould  af- 
cribe  the  manner  of  fpeaking  among  a  peo 
ple,  to  the  nature  of  their  government  and 
a  diftribution  of  their  property.  Yet  it  is 
an  undoubted  faft  that  the  drawling  nafal, 
manner  of  fpeaking  in  New  England  arifes 
almoft  folely  from  thefe  caufes. 

PEOPLE  of  large  fortunes,  who  pride 
themfelves  on  family  diftinftions,  poffefs  a 

certain 


DISSERTATION    I.       107 

certain  boldnefs,  dignity  and  independence 
in  their  manners,  which  give  a  correfpond- 
ent  air  to  their  mode  of  fpeaking.  Thofe 
who  are  accuftomed  to  command  flaves,form 
a  habit  of  expreffing  themfelves  with  the 
tone  of  authority  and  decifion. 

IN  New  England,  where  there  are  few 
flaves  and  fervants,  and  lef's  family  diftinc- 
tions  than  in  any  other  part  of  America, 
the  people  are  accuftomed  to  addrefs  each 
other  with  that  diffidence,  or  attention  to 
the  opinion  of  others,  which  marks  a  ftate 
of  equality.  Inftead  of  commanding,  they 
advife ;  inftead  of  faying,  with  an  air  of  de 
cifion,  you  muft  ;  they  afk  with  an  air  of 
doubtfulnefs,  is  it  not  be  ft  ?  or  give  their 
opinions  with  an  indecifive  tone ,  you  bad 
better,  I  believe.  Not  pofleffing  that  pride 
and  confcioufnefs  of  fuperiority  which  at 
tend  birth  and  fortune,  their  intercourfe 
with  each  other  is  all  condufted  on  the  i- 
dea  of  equality,  which  gives  a  fingular  tone 
to  their  language  aud  complexion  to  their 
manners, 

THESE  remarks  do  not  apply  to  the  com 
mercial  towns  ;  for  people  who  are  con- 
verfant  with  a  variety  of  company  lofe  moft 
of  their  fingularities,  and  hence  well  bred 

people 


DISSERTATION    If. 


people  referable  each  other  in  all  countries, 
But  the  peculiar  traits  of  national  charac 
ter  £re  round  in  the  internal  parts  of  a 
country,  among  that  clafs  of  people  who 
do  not  travel,  nor  are  tempted  by  an  inter- 
courfe  with  foreigners,  to  quit  their  own 
habits.* 

SUCH  are  the  caufea  of  the  local  peculi 
arities  in  pronunciation,  which  prevail  a- 
mong  the  country  people  in  New  England, 
and  which,  to  foreigners,  are  the  objects 
of  ridicule.  The  great  error  in  their  man 
ner  of  {peaking  proceeds  immediately  from 
not  opening  the  mouth  fufficiently.  Hence 
words  are  drawled  out  in  a  carelefs  lazy 
manner,  or  the  found  finds  a  paffage  thro 
the  nofe. 

NOTHING  can  be  fo  difagreeable  as  that 
drawling,  whining  cant  that  diftinguifh- 
es  a  certain  clafs  of  people  ;  and  too  much 
pains  cannot  be  taken  to  reform  the  prac 

tice. 

*  HENCE  the  furprifing  fimilarity  between  the  idioms 
of  the  New  England  people  and  thole  of  Chaucer,  Shake- 
fpear,  Congreve,  &c.  who  wrote  in  the  true  Englifh  flile. 
It  is  remarked  by  a  certain  author,  that  the  inhabitants  of 
iflands  beft  preferve  their  native  tongue.  New  England  has 
been  in  the  lituation  of  an  i  (land  ;  during  160  years,  the  people 
except  in  a  lew  commercial  towns,  have  not  been  expoied 
to  any  of  the  caufes  which  effect  great  changes  in  lari^uajs 
and  manners. 


DISSERTATION    IL       109 

tice.  Great  efforts  fhould  be  made  by 
teachers  of  fchools,  to  make  their  pupils  o- 
pen  the  teeth,  and  give  a  full  clear  found 
to  every  fyllable.  The  beauty  of  fpeaking 
confifts  in  giving  each  letter  and  fyllable 
its  due  proportion  of  found,  with  a  prompt 
articulation. 

THUS  in  order  to  pronounce  cow,  power, 
or  gown  with  propriety,  the  pupil  ihould 
be  taught,  •  after  placing  the  organs  in  the 
pofition  required  by  the  firft  cqnfbnant,  to 
open  his  mouth  wide,  before  he  begins  the 
found  of  ow  :  Otherwife  in  pafling  from 
that  pofition  to  the  aperture  neceifary  to 
pronounce  ow,  he  will  inevitably  articulate 
ee,  keow. 

A  SIMILAR  method  is  recommended  to 
thofe  polite  fpeakers  who  are  fo  fond  of 
imitating  the  Englifh  ftage  pronunciation 
as  to  embrace  every  fmgularity,  however 
difagreeable.  I  refer  to  the  very  modern 
pronunciation  of  kind,  Jky,  guide,  &c.  in 
which  we  hear  the  fhort  e  before  />  keindy  or 
kyind,  Jkey,  &c.  This  is  the  fame  barba 
rous  dialeft,  as  the  kevw  and  <veow  of  the 
caftern  country  people.  Yet,  ftrange  as  it 
may  feem,  it  is  the  elegant  pronunciation 
of  the  faihionable  people  both  in  England 

and      ; 


no      DISSERTATION    11; 

and  America.  Even  Sheridan,  who  has 
laid  it  down  as  a  rule  that  /  is  a  dipthong, 
compofed  of  aw  and  ee,  has  prefixed  a  y 
fliort  to  its  found  in  feveral  words  ;  as 
kyind>/kyiy  gyide,  &c.  We  may  with  equal 
propriety  prefix  e  to  the  dipthong  ow,  or  to 
o  in  folly  or  to  oo  in  fool,  or  to  any  other 
vowel.  It  is  prefumed  that  the  bare  men 
tion  of  fuch  barbarifms  will  be  fufficient 
to  reftrain  their  progrefs,  both  in  New  Eng 
land  and  on  the  Britifh  theater. 

SOME  of  the  fouthern  people,  particu* 
larly  in  Virginia,  almoft  omit  the  found 
of  r  as  in  ware,  there.  In  the  beft  Englifli 
pronunciation,  the  found  of  r  is  much 
fofter  than  in  fome  of  the  neighboring 
languages,  particularly  the  Irifh  and  Span- 
ifli  ;  and  probably  much  fofter  than  in  the 
ancient  Greek.  But  there  feems  to  be  no 
good  reafon  for  omitting  the  found  alto 
gether  ;  nor  can  the  omiflion  be  defended 
on  the  ground,  either  of  good  prafHce  or 
of  rules.  It  feems  to  be  a  habit  cont rafted 
by  careleffnefs. 

IT  is  a  cuftom  very  prevalent  in  the 
middle  ftates,  even  among  fome  well  bred 
people,  to  pronounce  off\  foft,  drop,  crop* 
with  the  found  of  a,  aj}\  faff,  drap*  crap. 

This 


DISSERTATION    II.      m 

This  feems  to  be  a  foreign  and  local  di~ 
ale6t ;  and  cannot  be  advocated  by  any 
perfon  who  underilands  correft  Eng- 
lifh.  [L] 

IN  the  middle  ftates  alfb,  many  people 
pronounce  a  /  at  the  end  of  once  and  twice^ 
meet  and  twicet.  This  grofs  impropriety 
would  not  be  mentioned,  but  for  its  prev 
alence  among  a  clafs  of  very  well  educated 
people ;  particularly  in  Philadelphia  and 
Baltimore. 

FOTCH  for  fetch  is  very  common,  in  fev- 
eral  ftates,  but  not  among  the  better  claff- 
es  of  people.  Cotched  for  caught  is  more 
frequent,  and  equally  barbarous. 

SKROUD  and  Jkrouge  for  croud>  are  fome- 
times  heard  among  people  that  fliould  be 
afhamed  of  the  leaft  vulgarifm. 

MOUGHT  for  might  is  heard  in  moft  of 
the  ftates,  but  not  frequently  except  in  a 
few  towns.  [M] 

HOLPE  for  help  I  have  rarely  heard  ex 
cept  in  Virginia.  Tote  is  local  in  Virgin 
ia  and  its  neighborhood.  In  meaning  it 
is  nearly  equivalent  to  carry.  I  have  tak 


112      DISSERTATION    it 

en  great  pains  to  difcover  the  etymology 
of  the  local  terms  ufed  in  the  feveral 
ftates  5  but  this  word  has  yet  eluded  my 
diligence.* 

CHORE,  a  corruption  of  char,  is  an  Eng* 
lifli  word,  ftill  ufed  in  many  parts  of 
England,  as  a  char -man y  a  char^t&omariy 
but  in  America^  it  is  perhaps  confined  to 
New  England.  It  fignifies  fmall  domef* 
tic  jobs  of  work,  and  its  place  cannot  be 
fupplied  by  any  other  fingle  word  in  the 
language. 

THESE  local  words,  and  others  of  lefs 
note,  are  gradually  growing  into  difufe, 
and  will  probably  be  loft  :  Except  fuch 
as  are  neceffary  in  fome  particular  occupa 
tion. 

THE  pronunciation  of  w  for  v  is  a  pre 
vailing  praftice  in  England  and  America  : 
It  is  particularly  prevalent  in  Bofton  and 

Philadelphia. 

*  I  HAVE  once  met  with  the  word  in  Chaucer's  Plow 
man's  Tale  20 14. 

"  THE  other  fide  hen  pore  and  pale, 
And  peple  yput  out  of   prefc, 
And  iemin  caitiffs  fore  a  cale, 
And  er  in  one  without  encreafe  ; 
Iclepid  Lollers  and  Londlefe  j 
"Who  totetb  on  'hem  thei  ben  untall  j 
They  ben  arayid  all  for  pece, 
But  faUhed  foule  mote  it  bef  All." 


DISSERTATION    IL      nj 

Philadelphia.*    Many  people  fay  weal,  <wef+ 
Jel,  for  veal,  veffeL 

THESE  letters  are  eafily  miftaken  for 
each  other,  and  the  name  of  the  letter  w 
now  ufed,  is  a  proof  that  the  letter  v  was 
formerly  called  u  or  oo.  The  letter  in  the 
Roman  language  had  the  found  we  now 
give  w  in  will.  Via  and  vinum,  pronoun 
ced  wia,  nvinuffi,  have  fufFered  but  a  fmall 
change  of  pronunciation  in  our  way,  wine. 
In  old  Englifh  books,  down  to  Shakefpear, 
v  was  written  for  the  Ihort  u,  as  vp,  vn- 
der  ;  for  up,  under.  On  the  other  hand,  u 
was  written  where  we  now  write  v,  as  uery, 
every,  for  very,  every.  It  feems  therefore, 
that  v  had  formerly  the  found  of  w  or  oo  ; 
and  that  inftead  of  corrupting  the  language, 
the  Cockneys  in  London,  and  their  imita-* 
tors  in  America,  who  fay  weal,  wery,  have 
retained  the  primitive  pronunciation.  In 
confirmation  of  this  opinion,  it  may  be  ob- 
ferved  that  the  Danes,  who  fpeak  a  diale£l 
of  the  Saxon,  have  no  w  in  their  language, 
but  where  we  write  w,  they  write  v,  and 

where 

*  I  AM  at  a  lofs  to  determine,  why  this  practice  fhould 
prevail  in  Bofton  and  not  in  Connecticut.  The  firft  and 
principal  fettlers  in  Hartford  came  from  the  vicinity  of 
Bofton.  Vaft  numbers  of  people  in  Bofton  and  the 
neighborhood  ufe  w  for  v ;  yet  I  never  once  heard  this 
pronunciation  in  Connecticut, 

H 


DISSERTATION*    IL 


where  we  write  wh,  they  invariably  write 
hv  -y  as  Wild)  'wind  ;  <vej,  way  ;  vader,  wade  $ 
bvad,  what  ;  hvide,  white  \  hvi,  why.  The 
Germans,whofe  language  is  another  branch 
of  the  fame  flock,  invariably  pronounce  w 
as  we  do  1?  ;  wall,  vail  ;  wir,  inr,  we  ;  wol-* 
left,  roollen,  will  ;  and  v  they  pronounce  as 
we  do/  ;  as  vergeffen,fergeffen3  which  is  the 
fame  as  the 


THE  retaining  the  old  found  of  <u  is  a 
proof  of  the  force  of  cuftom  ;  but  finee  the 
nation  in  general  have  annexed  to  it  a  pre^ 
ciie  found,  as  well  as  to  wy  every  perfon 
fhould  refign  his  peculiarities  for  the  fake 
of  uniformity. 

BUT  there  are  fome  points  in  pronun 
ciation,  in  which  the  beft  informed  people 
differ,  both  in  opinion  and  pra£tice. 

THE  words  Jhall,  quality,  quantity,  qualify, 
quandary,  quadrant,  are  differently  pronoun 
ced  by  good  fpeakers.  Some  give  a  a  broad 
found,  z&fhol,  quolity;  and  others,  its  fecond 
found,  as  in  hat.  With  refpeft  to  the  four 
firft,  almoft  all  the  ftandard  writers*  agree 
to  pronounce  a  fhort,  as  in  hat  :  And  this  is 

the 

*  BY  ftandard  writers,  I  mean,  Kenrick,  Sheridan,  Burn, 
Perry  and  Scott. 


DISSERTATION    II;      114 

the  ftage  pronunciation.  It  is  correft,  for 
it  is  more  agreeable  to  the  analogy  of  the 
language  ;  that  being  the  proper  found  of 
the  Englifh  a  which  is  heard  in  hat  or  bar* 
With  refpeft  to  the  two  laft,  authors  differ; 
fome  give  the  firft,  fome  the  fecond,  and 
others  the  fifth  found.  They  all  pretend 
to  give  us  the  court  pronunciation,  and  as 
they  differ  fo  widely,  we  muft  fupjpofe  that 
eminent  fpeakers  differ  in  praftice.  In 
fuch  a  cafe,  we  can  hardly  hefitate  a  mo 
ment  to  call  in  analogy  to  decide  the  quef- 
tion,  and  give  a  in  all  thefe  words,  as  alfo 
in  quajh,  its  fecond  found.* 

THE  words  either,  neither ',  deceit,  conceit* 
receipt^  are  generally  pronounced,  by  the 
eaftern  people,  ither,  nither,  defate,  confate, 
refate.  Thefe  are  errors  ;  all  the  ftandard 
authors  agree  to  give  <?/,  in  thefe  words,  the 
found  of  ee.  This  is  the  praftice  in  Eng 
land,  in  the  middle  and  fouthern  ftates, 
and,  what  is  higher  authority,  analogy 
warrants  the  practice.  Indeed  it  is  very 
abfurd  to  pronouce  the  verb  conceive,  con- 
feme,  and  the  noun  conceit,  confute.  Suck 

aa 

*  THE  diftin&ion  in  the  pronunciation  of  a  in  quality* 
tvhen  it  fignifies  the  property  of  fome  body,  and  when  it  is 
uied  for  high  rank,  appears  to  me  without  foundation  in 
practice, 

H  z 


n6      DISSERTATION    It 

an  inconfiftency  will  hardly  find  advocates^ 
except  among  the  prejudiced  and  unin 
formed. 

IMPORTANCE  is,  by  a  few  people,  pro-* 

nounced  importance  -y  with  the  firft  found 
of  o.  The  reafon  alleged  is,  that  it  is  a 
derivative  of  import  :,  and  o  fhould  preferve 
the  fame  found  it  has  in  the  original.  It 
feems  however  to  be  affectation,  for  the 
ftandard  writers  and  general  praftice  are 
oppofed  to  it.  Indeed  it  may  be  confider- 
ed  as  a  mere  imitation  of  the  French  pro 
nunciation  of  the  fame  word. 


for  deci-fwe  is  mere  affefta- 
tion. 

REESTN  for  rat/in  is  very  prevalent  in  two 
or  three  principal  towns  in  America.  One 
of  the  ftandard  authors  gives  us  this  pro 
nunciation  *,  and  another  gives  us  both 
raijin  and  reefin.  But  all  the  others  pro 
nounce  the  word-rd^tf,  with  a  long  ;  and 
derivation,  analogy  and  general  cuftom, 
all  decide  in  ^favor  of  the  practice. 

LEISURE  is  fometimes  pronounced  leefure, 
and  fometimes  lezhure  :  The  latter  is  the 

moft 


DISSERTATION    IL       117 

moft  general  pronunciation  in  America. 
It  is  almoft  fingular  in  its  fpelling  ;  feizure 
being  the  only  word  in  analogy  with  it  ; 
and  this  is  a  derivative  from  Jeize.  The 
true  original  orthography  of  leifure  was 
leafure  ;  this  was  in  analogy  with  pleafure, 
meafure,  and  its  ancient  pronunciation  Hill 
remains. 

DICTIONARY  has  been  ufually  pronoun 
ced  dicfonary  \  But  its  derivation  from  dic- 
tion,  the  analogous  pronunciation  of  tion 
in  other  cafes,  and  all  the  ftandard  writers 
require  dicjhunary,  or  dicjhonary. 

ONE  author  of  eminence  pronounces  de 
file  in  three  fyllables,  def-i-le.     In  this  he 
is  fingular  ;  neither  general  praftice,  nor 
rules  warrant  the  pronunciation  j  and  all 
the  other  authorities  are  againft  him. 

WITH  refpe<5t  to  oblige,  authorities  dif 
fer.  The  ftandard  writers  give  us  both 
oblige  and  obleege^  and  it  is  impoflible  to  de 
termine  on  which  fide  the  weight  of  au 
thority  lies.  The  direft  derivation  of  the 
word  from  the  French  would  incline  us  to 
prefer  obleege^  in  the  analogy  of  fatigue^  ma- 
tbine,  antique,  pique,  marine,  oblique,  which 
laniformly  preierve  the  French  i  or  Eng- 

iifh 


xi*      DISSERTATION    II. 


Jifli  ee.  Yet  Chefterfield  called  this 
ation,  and  it  might  be  fo  in  his  age  $  for 
the  opinions  of  men  are  capricious.  The 
Englifh  analogy  requires  /  long  in  oblige  j 
and  perhaps  this  fhould  incline  all  parties 
to  meet  each  other  on  that  beft  principle* 

SOME  people  very  erroneoufly  pronounce 
chaije,fia  in  the  fingular,  andjhaze  in  the 
plural.  The  fingular  number  isjhaze,  and 
the  plural,  Jhazes. 

OUR  modern  faihionable  fpeakers  ac 
cent  European  on  the  laft  fyllable  but  one. 
This  innovation  has  happened  within  a 
few  years  :  I  fay  innovation  ;  for  it  is  a 
violation  of  an  eftablifhed  principle  of  the 
language,  that  words  ending  in  ean  have 
the  accent  on  the  laft  fyllable  but  two  : 
Witnefs  Mediterranean,  Pyre'nean,  Hercu'** 
lean,  fubterra'nean.  I  do  not  advert  to  an 
exception^  and  why  European  fhould  be 
made  one,  it  is  difficult  to  determine.  The 
reafon  given  by  fome,  that  e  in  the  penul- 
tima  reprefents  the  Latin  dip  thongs,  which 
was  long,  is  of  little  weight,  oppafed  to 
the  general  praftice  of  a  nation,  and  to  an 

eftablilhed 

*  HYM.F,NEdNzr\&  hymeneal  are,  by  fome  writers,  ac» 
cented  on  the  laft  iyllable  but  one  ;  but  erroneoufly.  Other 
Authorities  preiefve  the  analogy. 


DISSERTATION    IL       119 

eftablifhed  principle.  The  flandard  au 
thors,  in  this  inftance,  as  in  all  others, 
where  practice  is  not  uniform,  very  ab«- 
furdly  give  both  pronunciations,  that  we 
may  take  our  choice.  As  this  is  a  very 
eafy  method  of  getting  over  difficulties,  and 
pafling  along  without  giving  offence,  fo  it 
is  a  certain  way  to  perpetuate  differences 
in  opinion  and  practice,  and  to  prevent  the 
eftabliihment  of  any  ftandard.  Analogy 
requires  Euro'pean,  and  this  is  fupported 
by  as  good  authorities  as  the  other. 

ROME  is  very  frequently  pronounced 
Room,  and  that  by  people  of  every  clals. 
The  authors  I  have  confulted  give  no  light 
upon  this  word,  except  Perry,  who  directs 
to  that  pronunciation.  The  practice  how 
ever,  is  by  no  means  general  in  America  : 
There  are  many  good  fpeakers  who  give  o 
its  firft  found.  It  feems  very  abfurd  to 
give  o  its  firft  found  in  Romtjf^  Romans, 
and  pronounce  it  oo  in  Rome,  the  radical 
word.  I  know  of  no  language  in  Europe, 
in  which  o  has  not  one  uniform  found,  viz. 
the  found  we  give  it  in  rofe.  It  is  perhaps 
the  only  vowel,  in  the  found  of  which  all 
nations  agree.  In  Engliih.  it  has  other 
founds  ;  but  the  firft  is  its  proper  one.  A 
great  proportion  of  people  in  America  have 

reftored 


120      DISSERTATION    II. 

reftored  the  analogy  of  pronunciation  in 
giving  o  its  firft  found  in  Rome  ;  and  a  de- 
fire  of  uniformity  would  lead  us  to  extend 
the  praftice.* 

IN  the  pronunciation  of  arch  in  many 
compound  words,  people  are  not  uniform. 
The  dilputed  words  are  archangel^  arche 
type -,  architecture^  architrave,,  archives.  There 
feems  to  be  no  fettled  principle  of  analogy, 
by  which  the  queition  can  be  determined. 
Etymology  would  require  ch,  in  Greek  and 
Hebrew  derivatives,  to  have  uniformly  the 
found  of  k ;  but  before  moft  confonants, 
fuch  a  pronunciation  is  harfh  ;  for  which 
reafon  it  is  generally  foftened  into  the 
Engliih  cb,  as  arcbbijhop.  But  before  vow 
els,  as  in  the  words  juft  enumerated,  the 
beft  praftice  has  decided  for  the  found  of 
k  ;  and  euphony,  as  well  as  derivation,  fa* 
vors  the  decifion.  [N] 

THE  found  of  ch  in  chart  is  likewife  dif- 
puted  ;  and  the  ftandard:  authors  are  di- 
reclly  oppofed  to  each  other.  There  is  as 

good 

*  THIS  is  the  found  which  the  rhime  requires  in  the  fol* 
lowing  verfes  : 

"  Give  care  to  me  that  ten  years  fought  for  Rome, 
Yet  reaprdifgrace  at  my  returning  home." 

Rel.  An.  Poet,  p,  204. 


DISSERTATION    II.       121 

good  foreign  authority  on  one  fide  as  the 
other  ;  but  in  America,  cb  has  generally 
its  foft  or  Englifh  found.  This  muft  per 
haps  be  preferred,  contrary  to  etymology  5 
for  we  uniformly  give  cb  that  found  in 
charter,  which  is  from  the  fame  original  j 
and  this  alfo  diftinguifhes  the  word  from 
cart ;  a  reafon  which  is  not  without  its 
weight 

-  THERE  are  many  people  who  omit  the 
afpirate  in  moft  words  which  begin  with 
&ff ,  as  white,  whip,  &c.  which  they  pro 
nounce  wite,  wtp.  To  fuch  it  is  neceffary 
only  to  obferve,  that  in  the  pure  Englifh 
pronunciation,  both  in  Great  Britain  and 
New  England,  for  it  is  exaftly  the  fame  in 
both,  h  is  not  filent  in  a  fingle  word  begin 
ning  with  wb.  In  this  point  our  ftandard 
authors  differ  ;  two  of  them  afpirating  the 
whole  of  thefe  words,  and  three,  marking 
it  in  moft  of  them  as  mute.  But  the  omit, 
fion  of  h  feems  to  be  a  foreign  corruption ; 
for  in  America,  1.  is  not  known  among  the 
unmixed  defcendants  of  the  Englifh.  Sher 
idan  has  here  given  the  true  Englifh  pro 
nunciation.  In  this  clafs  of  words,  w.  is 
filent  in  four  only,  with  their  derivatives  j 
viz,  who,  whole,  whoop,  whore. 

ONE 


122      DISSERTATION    II. 

ONE  or  two  authors  affeft  to  pronounce 
buman,  and  about  twenty  other  words  be 
ginning  with  hy  as  tho  they  were  fpelt  y«- 
man*  This  is  a  grofs  error.  The  only 
word^that  begins  with  this  found,  is  humor, 
with  its  derivatives .  In  the  American  pro 
nunciation,  h  is  filent  in  the  following, 
hone  ft,  honor,  hour,  humor,  herb,  heir,  with 
their  derivatives.  To  thefe  the  Engliih 
add  hofpital,  hoftler,  humble  ;  but  an  imita- 
tio$  of  thefe,  which  fome  induftrioufly  af- 
fe<5l,  cannot  be  recommended,  as  every  o- 
million  of  the  afpirate  ferves  to  mutilate 
and  weaken  the  language, 

THE 


*  PARTICULAR LY  Perry.  I  am  furprized  that  his  pro 
nunciation  has  found  fo  many  advocates  in  this  country,  as 
there  is  none  more  erroneous. 

I  WOULD  juft  remark  here  that  many  writers  ufe  an  be 
fore  h  afpirate,  infteadof#  ;  which  pra6tice  feerns  not  well 
founded.  The  rapid  found  of  the  article  a  is  indiftincl, 
but  opens  the  mouth  to  a  proper  pofition  to  pronounce  h  ; 
whereas  n  places  the  end  of  the  tongue  under  the  upper 
teeth,  and  the  mouth  afiumes  a  new  pofition,  before  the  af- 
piration  can  be  formed.  A  hundred,  a  houfe,  &c.  are 
therefore  much  more  eafily  articulated,  than  an  hundred, 
an  houfe. 

THUS  a  Should  always  be  ufed  before  y  confonant,  and 
coniequently  before  u  when  it  has  the  fame  found,  as  in 
union,  universal,  &c.  Indeed  I  cannot  account  for  the  ufe  of 
an  before^,  on  any  other  principle  than  this,  that  the  perfans 
who  ufe  it  do  not  pronounce  y  at  all.  If  they  make  y  the 
fame  as  ee3  it  is  coruiftent  to  write  an  before  it  j  but  this  is  a,a 
error. 


DISSERTATION    II.       123 

THE  word  yelk  is  fometimes  written  yelk 
and  pronounced  yoke.  But  yelk  is  the  moft 
correft  orthography,  from  the  Saxon  gea/k- 
<we ;  and  in  this  country,  it  is  the  general 
pronunciation. 

EWE  is,  by  the  Englifo,  often  pronoun-, 
ced  yo  5  which  is  fometimes  heard  in  A- 
menca.  But  analogy  and  the  general  cor- 
refponding  praftice  in  this  country,  with 
the  authority  of  fome  of  the  moft  accuse 
writers,  decide  for  yew. 

THE  Eiiglifh  fpeakers  of  eminence  have 
fhortened  the  vowel  in  the  firft  fyllable  of 
tyranny,  zealous,  facrifice,  &c.  altho  in  the 
primitive  words,  all  agree  to  give  the  vow 
el  its  firft  found,  This  pronunciation  has 
not  fpread  among  the  people  of  this  coun 
try  ;  but  our  learned  men  have  adopted 
it ;  and  it  feems  in  fome  degree  to  be  the 

fenius  of  our  language.     In  child,  clean, 
oly,  &c.  we  uniformly  give  the  firft  vowel 
its  long  found  ;  but  when  a  fyllable  is  add 
ed,  we  always  fhorten  it  j  children, 
holy  day. 

ON  the  other  hand,  many  people  in  A- 
merica  fay  pat-rony  mat-ron  -,  whereas  the 
fey  either  fa-tron  or  fat-ron,  ma* 

'iron 


124      DISSERTATION    II. 

iron  or  mat-rcn  ;  but  all  agree  in  faying, 
paf-ronage.  In  patriot,  patriotifm,  the  Eng- 
lifh  give  a  its  long  found  ;  but  a  great  part 
of  the  Americans,  its  fhort  found.  In  all 
thefe  cafes,  where  people  are  not  uniform, 
I  fhould  prefer  the  fhort  found  ;  for  it  ap 
pears  to  me  the  moft  analogous. 


,  the  Englifh  pronounce  with  the 
third  found  of  a  or  aw  ;  but  the  Americans 
airport  univerfally  preferve  the  analogous 
found,  as  in  bath,  path.  This  is  the  cor- 
reft  pronunciation  ;  and  why  fhould  we 
rejeft  it  for  wroth,  which  is  a  corruption  ? 
If  the  Englifh  praftice  is  erroneous,  let  it 
remain  fo  ;  we  have  no  concern  with  it  : 
By  adhering  to  our  own  practice,  we  pre 
ferve  a  fuperiority  over  the  Englifh,  in 
thofe  inftances,  in  which  ours  is  guided  by 
rules  j  and  fo  far  ought  we  to  be  from  con 
forming  to  their  praflice,  that  they  ought 
rather  to  conform  to  ours. 

IT  is  difputed  whether  g  fhould  have  its 
hard  or  foft  found,  in  homogeneous  and  hetero 
geneous  :  On  this  queftion  the  ftandard  au 
thors  are  not  agreed.  The  hard  found,  as 
in  go,  coincides  with  etymology  ;  but  anal 
ogy  requires  the  other,  as  in  genius.  The 
fame  remarks  apply  to  j  in  pblogijlon. 

IN 


DISSERTATION    II.      125 

IN  the  middle  and  fouthern  fates,  farce, 
pierce,  tierce,  are  pronounced  feerce,  peerce, 
teerce.  To  convince  the  people  of  the  im 
propriety  of  this  pronunciation,  it  might 
be  fufficient  to  inform  them,  that  it  is  not 
fafnionable  on  the  Engliih  theater.  For 
thofe  who  want  better  proofs,  before  they 
relinquifti  their  praftice,  I  would  obferve, 
that  thefe  words  are  derived  to  us  from  the 
French  ;  fierce,  tierce,  fromfars,  tiers,  and 
pierce  from  percer.  In  the  two  former, 
the  French  pronounce  both  /  and  e  ;  but 
it  is  evident  the  Englifh  originally  pro 
nounced  e  only  ;  for  the  /  was  omitted  in 
the  fpelling  offeree,  and  was  not  intro 
duced  into  pierce  till  after  Spenfer  wrote. 

«c — WHEN  he  him  knew  and  had  his  tale  herd, 
Asfers  as  a  Icon  pulled  out  his  fwerd." 

Chaucer,  Knightes  Tale  1 600. 

«THE  drought  of  March  hath  perced  to  the  rote." 

Canterbury  Tales, 

««FoR  they  this  queen  attended  ;  in  whofe  ftced, 
Oblivion  laid  him  down  on  Laura's  herfe  : 
Hereat  the  hardeft  ftones  were  feen  to  bleed, 
And  grones  of  buried  ghoftsthe  heavens  did  perfe." 
Verfes  to  Edmond  Spenfer. 

PIERCE  is  allo  made  to  rhime  with  re- 
hearje.     Pope  makes  it  rhime  with   uni- 

•uerfe. 


126      DISSERTATION    It 

«  H£J  who  thro  vafl.  immenfity  can  pierce, 
See  worlds  on  worlds  compofe  one  univerfe." 

Effay  on  Man,  23. 

THE  rhime  in  the  laft  quotation,  is  not 
Unequivocal  proof  of  the  pronunciation  in 
Pope's  time ;  but  the  orthography  in  Chau-» 
cer's  and  Spenfer's  writings,  are  to  me  fat- 
isfaftory  evidence  that  e  in  thefe  words  was 
fhort.  The  ftandard  Englifh  pronuncia 
tion  now  is  fercc,  fierce,  terce,  and  it  is  u- 
niverfai  in  New  England.  I  have  only  to 
add,  that  the  {harp  abrupt  found  of  e  in 
the  two  firft  words  is  moft.  happily  adapted 
to  exprefs  the  ideas. 

THE  Englifh  pronounce  leap,  lep  ;  and 
that  in  the  prefent  tenfe  as  well  as  the  paft. 
Some  of  our  American  horfemen  liave 
learnt  the  praftice  -,  but  among  other  peo 
ple,  it  is  almoft  unknown.  It  is  a  breach 
of  analogy,  at  leaft  in  the  prefent  tenfe  j 
the  American  pronunciation,  leep,  is  there 
fore  the  moil  correct  and  ihould  not  be  re- 
iinquiihed. 

IN  the  fafhionable  world,  heard  is  pro 
nounced  herd  or  hurd.  This  was  almoft 
unknown  in  America  till  the  commence 
ment  of  the  late  war,  and  how  long  it  has 

been 


DISSERTATION    II.       127 

been  the  pra&ice  in  England,  I  cannot  de 
termine.  By  Chaucer's  orthography,  one 
would  imagine  that  it  had  been  handed 
down  from  remote  antiquity ;  for  he  writes 
herd,  herdey  and  her  den.*  In  reading  more 
modern  poets,  I  have  rarely  found  any  in- 
ftance  of  a  verfe's  clofing  with  this  word  ; 
fo  that  it  is  difficult  to  fay  what  has  been, 
the  general  praftice  among  the  learned* 
But  for  centuries,  the  word  has  been  uni 
formly  fpelt  heard  $  the  verb  hear  is  in  an 
alogy  with  fear,  fear,  and  yet  e  in  the  paft 
time  and  participle  has  been  omitted,  as 
heard,  not  beared.  That  herdvt&s  not  form 
erly  the  pronunciation,  is  probable  from 
this  circumflance  ,  the  Americans  were 
flrangers  to  it  when  they  came  from  Eng 
land,  and  the  body  of  the  people  are  fo  to 
this  day.-f-  To  mofl  people  in  this  coun 
try,  the  Englifh  pronunciation  appears  like 

affeftation, 

*  SEE  Canterbury  Tales  and  Prologue,  L.  221,  955, 
1599,15382. 

•f  To  prove  that  the  Americans  have  a  corrupt  pronun 
ciation,  we  are  often  told  that  our  anceftors  came  from  the 
weftern  counties  of  England.  This  is  but  partially  true, 

THE  company  that  purchafed  New  England,  was  indeed 
called  the  Plymouth  Company ,  being  compofed  principally  of 
perfons  belonging  to  the  county  of  Devon.  But  many  of 
the  principal  fetrlers  in  thefe  ftates  came  from  London  and 
its  vicinity ;  iomc  from  the  middle  counties,  the  ancient 

kingdom 


123      DISSERTATION    It 

affectation,  and  is  adopted  only  in  the  cap-* 
ital  towns,  which  are  always  the  moft  ready 
to  diftinguifh  themfelves  by  an  implicit 
imitation  of  foreign  cuftoms.  Analogy 
requires  that  We  fhould  retain  our  former 
practice ;  for  we  may  as  well  change  f ear 
ed,  fear  ed>  mtoferdyferd,  as  to  change  heard 

into  herd. 

^          \ 

BEAR.D  is  fometimes,  but  erroneoufly, 
pronounced  beerd.  General  praflice,  both 
in  England  and  America,  requires  that  e 
fliould  be  pronounced  as  in  were,  and  I 
know  of  no  rule  oppofed  to  the  pr a6lice. 

DEAF  is  generally  pronounced  deef.  It 
is  the  univerfal  practice  in  the  .eaftem 
ftates  ;  and  it  is  general  in  the  middle  and 
fouthern  ;  tho  fome  have  adopted  the  Eng- 
lifh  pronunciation,  def.  The  latter  is  evi 
dently  a  corruption  ;  for  the  word  is  in 
analogy  with  leaf  andjheafy  and  has  been 
from  time  immemorial.  So  in  Sir  William 
Temple's  works,  Virg.  Eel. 

-"  WE  fmg-not  to  the  deaF, 


An  anfwcr  comes  from  every  trembling  leaf." 

LEAP 

kingdom  of  Mercia  ;  and  a  few  from  the  northern  counties* 
To  (how  the  falfehood  of  the  charge,  with  rcfpea  to  the 
language,  it  may  be  afierted  with  truth,  that  there  is  not  the 
leaft  affinity  between  the  language  of  the  New  England 

nle  and  the  fpecimens  of  the  DeVonftiirc  dialeft,  given 
e  Englifli  Magazines. 


DISSERTATION    II.       129 

LEAF  and  dtaf,  with  a  different  orthog 
raphy,  are  repeatedly  made  to  rhime  in 
Chaucer's  works ;  as  in  the  Wife  of  Bath's 
Prologue,  L.  6217, 

"  Fofc  that  I  rent  out  of  his  book  a  lefe, 
•  That  of  the  (broke  myn  ere  wex  al  defe.** 

So  alfo  line  6249. 

THIS  was  the  orthography  of  his  time? 
and  an  almoft  conclufive  evidence  that  deaf 
was  pronounced  deef*     This  pronuncia 
tion  is  generally  retained  in  America,  and 
analogy  requires  it* 

THIS  differtation  will  he  clofed  with  one 
obfervation,  which  the  reader  may  have 
made  upon  the  foregoing  criticifms  :  That 
in  many  inftances  the  Americans  flill  ad 
here  to  the  analogies  of  the  language,  where 
the  Englifh  have  infringed  them.  So  far 
therefore  as  the  regularity  of  conftruftion 
is  concerned,  we  ought  to  retain  our  own 
praftice  and  be  our  own  ftandards.  The 
Englifh  praftice  is  an  authority ;  but  con- 
fidering  the  force  of  cuftorrl  and  the  caprice 
of  fafhion,  their  practice  muft  be  as  liable 

to 

*  THE  digraph  ea  feems  not  to  have  been  much  ufed  in 
that  age  ;  forfpcak  authors  vrrotefpske ',  for  el  far,  den ;  for 
lea/,  Iffs. 

I 


DISSERTATION    IL 


to  changes  and  to  errors,  as  the 
of  a  well  educated  yeomanry,  who  are  gov 
erned  by  habits  and  not  eafily  led  aftray  by 
novelty.  In  the  infiances  where  we  have 
adhered  to  analogy,  no  confideration  can 
warrant  us  in  reiigning  our  praftiee  to  the 
authority  of  a  foreign  court,  which,  thro 
mere  affeftation,  may  have  embraced  many 
obvious  errors.  In  doubtful  cafes,  to  pay 
a  fuitable  deference  to  the  opinions  of  oth 
ers,  is  wife  and  prudent  ;  but  to  renounce 
an  obvious  principle  of  propriety  becaufe 
others  have  renounced  it,  is  to  carry  our 
compilaifance  for  the  faults  of  the  great> 
much  farther  than  we  can  juftify,  and  in  a 
nation,  it  is  an  ad  of  iervility  that  wants  a 
name. 


DISSERTATION 


DISSERTATION   III.  $ 


Examination  of  controverted  Points,  continu 
ed. — Of  modern  Corruptions  in  the  EngHJh 
Pronunciation. 


EXAMINATION  of  CONTROVERT- 
ED  POINTS,  continued. 


N  the  preceding  diiTertation 
I  have  endeavored  to  fettle 
a  number  of  controverted 
points  and  local  differences 
in  pronunciation,  on  the 
moft  fatisfaftofy  principles 
hitherto  difcovered.  I  now  proceed  to 
fome  other  differences  of  confequence  to 
the  language,  and  particularly  in  America. 

GOLD  is  differently  pronounced  by  good 
fpeakers,  and  differently  marked   by  the 
ftandard  writers.     Two  of  them  give  us 
I  2  goold 


DISSERTATION    lit 


y  as  the  ftandard,  and  three,  gold  or 
goo  Id.  But  we  may  find  better  principles 
than  the  opinions  or  praftice  of  individu 
als,  to  direft  our  judgement  in  this  particu 
lar.  The  ward  indeed  has  the  pronuncia 
tion,^^,  in  fome  of  the  collateral  branch 
es  of  the  Teutonic,  as  in  the  Danifh,  where 
it  is  fpelt  guld.  But  in  the  Saxon,  it  was 
written  gold.,  and  has  been  uniformly  writ 
ten  fo  in  Englifh.  Befides,  we  have  good 
reafon  to  believe  that  it  was,  in  early  times, 
pronounced  gold,  with  the  firft  found  of  of 
for  the  poets  invariably  make  it  rhime  with 
dd>  behold^  and  other  words  of  limilar  found* 
Thus  in  Chaucer  : 

«  WITH  nayles  yelwe,  and  bright  as  any  gold* 
He  hadde  a  here's  flkin,  cole  blake  for  old." 

Knight's  Taks,  L.  2143. 

IN  Pope  : 

"Now  Europe's  laurels-  on-  their  brows  behold, 
But  ftain'id  with  blood,  or  ill  exchang'd  for  gold." 

EflUy  on  Man,  Book  4. 

THE  rhime  is  here  a  prefumptive  proof 
that  the  poets  pronounced  this  word  with 
fhe  firft  found  of  0,  and  it  is  a  fubftantial 
jreafon  why  that  pronunciation  fhould  be 
preferred.  But  analogy  is  a  ftill  ftronger 
f  eafon  >  for  bold,  told,  fold,  and  I  prefume 

every 


DISSERTATION    III.       133 

every  fimilar  word  in  the  language,  has  the 
firft  found  of  0.  Thefe  are  good  reafons 
why  gold  ihould  have  that  found  ;  reafons 
which  are  permanent,  and  fuperior  to  any- 
private  opinions. 

SIMILAR  reafons,  and  equally  forceable, 
are  oppofed  to  the  modern  pronunciation 
of  'wound.  I  fay  modern  ;  for  in  America 
<woond  is  a  recent  innovation.  It  was  per 
haps  an  ancient  dialeft  ;  for  the  old  Saxon 
and  modern  Daniih  orthography  warrant 
this  conjecture. 

BUT  in  Englifh  the  fpelling  has  uni 
formly  correfponded  with  bound,  found.,  and 
if  we  may  judge  from  the  rhimes  of  our 
poets,  the  pronunciation  has  alfo  been  an 
alogous.  Thus  in  Skelton's  Elegy  on  Hen 
ry,  Earl  of  Northumberland,  1489,  we 
have  the  following  lines  : 


noble  erle  !  O  foul  myfurd*  ground 
Whereon  he  gat  his  finall  deadly  tuounde." 

Rel.  An.  Eng.  Poet.  vol.  i.  page  113, 

So  in  a  fong  which  feems  to  have  been 
written  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII. 

"  WHKRB 
*  MISUSED. 


i34      -DISSERTATION    111. 

"  WHERE  griping  grefes  the  hart  would  wounac 
And  doleful  dumps  themynde  opprefTe, 
There  muficke  with  her  {ilver  found, 
With  fpeed  is  wont  to  fend  redreffe." 

Ibm.  page  165. 

SIMILAR  rhimes  oecur  in  almoft  every 
page  of  modern  poetry. 

"WARRIORS  fhe  fires  with  animated  founds, 
Pours  balm  into  the  bleeding  lover's  zuounds." 

Pope. 

THE  fafhionable  pronunciation  of  wound 
deftroys  the  rhime  and  infringes  the  rule 
of  analogy  ;  two  objections  to  it  which 
can  be  removed  only  by  univerfal  prac 
tice.  Does  this  pra6lice  exift  ?  By  no 
means.  One  good  authority*  at  leaft,  di- 
re6ls  to  the  analogous  pronunciation ;  and 
another  compiler  directs  to  both— the  reg 
ular  and  the  fafhionable.  But  were  woond 
the  univerfal  praftice  in  Great  Britain,  this 
iliould  not  induce  us  to  lay  afide  our  own 
praftice  for  a  foreign  one.  There  is  but 
a  fmall  part,  even  of  the  well  bred  people 
in  this  country,  who  have  yet  adopted  the 
Englifh  mode  j  and  the  great  body  of  the 
people  uniformly  purfue  analogy.  The 

authority 

*  K  E  N  R  i  c  K  ,  who  was  not  guided  folely  by  the  fafiiiojp  of 
the  day,  but  paidfome  regard  to  the  regular  conflrutiion  of 
the  languane. 


DISSERTATION     III.       135 

authority  of  praftice  therefore,  is,  in  this 
country,  oppoied  to  the  innovation.  Shall 
we  then  relinquifh  what  every  man  muft 
acknowlege  to  be  right,  to  embrace  the 
corruptions  of  a  foreign  court  and  ftage  ? 
Will  not  the  Atlantic  ocean,  the  total  iep- 
aration  of  America  from  Great  Britain,  the 
pride  of  an  independent  nation,  the  rules 
of  the  language,  the  melody  of  Englifh  po 
etry,  reftrain  our  rage  for  imitating  the  er 
rors  of  foreigners  ? 

BUT  it  is  faid  that  ivoond  is  fofter  than 
wound,  and  therefore  more  agreeable.  Sup- 
pofe  the  aflertion  to  be  true,  will  it  follow 
that  the  foftelt  pronunciation  fhould  be 
preferred  ? 

IT  is  acknowleged  on  all  hands,  that  a 
correfpondence  between  found  and  fenfe  is 
a  beauty  in  language,  and  there  are  many 
words  in  our  language,  the  founds  of  which 
were  borrowed  from  the  fenfible  objefts,  the 
ideas  of  which  they  are  defigned  to  exprefs. 
Such  are  the  dafhing  of  waters,  the  crack 
ling  of  burning  faggots,  the  biffing  of  fer- 
pents,  the  lifping  of  infants,  and  \hz  flutter 
ing  of  ajtammerer.  Thefe  are  confidered 
as  beauties  in  a  language.  But  there  are 
other  words,  the  founds  of  which  are  not 

adopted 


136      DISSERTATION    HI, 

adopted  in  imitating  audible  noifes,  which 
are  either  foft  or  harfti,  and  by  the  help  of 
aflbciation  are  particularly  calculated  to 
exprefs  ideas,  which  are  either  agreeable  or 
difagreeable  to  the  mind.  Of  this  kind  are 
foft  and  harjh.fweet  and/our,  and  a  multi 
tude  of  others.  On  the  fuppofition  there 
fore,  that  ivoond  is  the  fofter  pronuncia 
tion,  this  is  a,  good  reafon  why  it  fhould 
not  be  adopted  ;  for  the  idea  it  conveys  i§ 
extremely  difagreeable,  and  much  better 
reprefented  by  a  harfh  word.* 

SKEPTIC  for  fceptic  is  mere  pedantry  ;  a 
modern  change  that  has  no  advantage  for 
its  object-  The  Greek  derivation  will  be 
pleaded  as  an  authority  •>  but  this  will 
not  warrant  the  innovation,  without  ex 
tending 

*  SHERIDAN  has  repeated  with  approbation,  a  cele 
brated  laying  of  Dean  Swift,  who  was  a  fiickler  for  analogy, 
in  pronouncing  uindlikemind,  bind,  with  the  firfl  found  of 

*  i. 

i.     The  Dean's  argument  was,  "  I  have  a  great  mind  to  find 

a 

why  ycna  pronounce  that  word  zvind."  I  would  beg  leave> 
to  afk  this  gentleman,  who  dire6ts  us  to  fay  woond,  if  any 
good  reafon  can  bs,  foond  why  he  founds  that  word  woond  ; 
and  whether  he  expefe  a  rational  people,  will  be  boond  to. 
follow  the  roond  of  court  improprieties  ?  We  acknowlegc 

that  mind  is  a  deviation  from  analogy  and  a  corruption  ;  but 
who  pronounces  it  otherwife  ?  Pra6Hce  was  almoft  wholly 
again fl  Swift,  and  in  America  at  learb,  it  is  as  generally  in 
favor  of  the  analogy  oi' wound.  A  partial  or  local  praclicca 
may  b«  brought  to  fupport  analogy,  but  fhould  be  na  au« 
thority  in  deflroying  it. 


DISSERTATION    III,       137 

tending  it  tofcene,  freptery  and  many  oth 
ers.  Will  the  advocates  write  and  pro* 
nounce  the  latter  Jkene,  Jkepter  ?  If  not, 
they  ftiould  be  fatisfied  with  analogy  and 
former  praftice.  It  is  remarkable  howev 
er,  that  notwithftanding  the  authority  of 
almoft  all  the  modern  diftionaries  is  in 
favor  of  ikeptic,  no  writer  of  reputation, 
whofe  works  I  have  feen,  has  followed  the 
fpelling.  The  old  orthography,  fceptic* 
ftill  maintains  its  ground. 

SAUCE  with  the  fourth  found  of  a  is  ao 
counted  vulgar  ;  yet  this  is  the  ancient, 
the  correft,  and  the  moft  general  pronun 
ciation.  The  aw  of  the  North  Britons  is 
much  affe&ed  Qfiattifaivce,  bawnt^  vawnf; 
yet  the  true  found  is  that  of  aunf,  jaunt L, 
and  a  change  can  produce  no  poffible  ad* 
vantage. 

THE  words  advertifement  and  cbaftifement 
#re  differently  accented  by  the  flandard 
authors,  and  l)y  people  on  both  fides  of  the 
Atlantic.  Let  us  find  the  analogy.  The 
original  words,  advertife  and  chaftife,  are 
verbs,  accented  uniformly  on  the  laft  fyl- 
lable.  Let  us  fearch  thro  the  language  for 
verbs  of  this  defcription,  and  I  prefume  we 
ihall  not  find  another  inftance,  where,  in 

nouns 


138      DISSERTATION    III. 

nouns  formed  from  fuch  verbs,  by  the  ad 
dition  of  menty  the  feat  of  the  accent  is 
changed.  We  find  amufement,  refinement, 
.refreshment,  reconcilement,  and  many, 
perhaps  all  others,  preferve  the  accent  of 
their  primitives  ;  and  in  this  analogy  we 
find  the  reafon  why  chaftifement  and  adver- 
tifement  fhould  be  accented  on  the  laft  fyl- 
lable  but  one.  This  analogy  is  a  fubftan- 
tial  and  permanent  rule,  that  will  forever 
be  fuperior  to  local  cuftoms.* 

SIMILAR  remarks  maybe  made  refpeft- 
ing  acceptable,  admirable,  dijputable,  compar 
able,  which  our  polite  fpeakers  accent  on 
the  firft  fyllable.  The  firft  is  indeed  ac 
cented  on  the  fecond  fyilable,  by  moft  au 
thors,  except  Sheridan,  who  ftill  retains 
the  accent  on  the  firft. 

IT  was  an  old  rule  of  grammarians,  that 
the  genius  of  our  language  requires  the  ac 
cent  to  be  carried  as  far  as  poffible  to 
wards  the  beginning  of  the  word.  This 
is  feldom  or  never  true  j  on  the  contrary, 
the  rule  is  direftly  oppofed  to  the  melody, 
both  of  poetry  and  profe.  Under  the  in 
fluence, 

*  GOVERNMENT,  management,  retain  alfo  the  accent  of 
their  primitives  ;  and  the  nouns  teftamcntt  compliment^  &c» 
form  another  analogy. 


DISSERTATION    III.       139 

fluence,  however,  of  this  rule,  a  long  cat 
alogue  of  words  loft  their  true  pronuncia 
tion,  and  among  the  reft,  a  great  number 
of  adjeftives  derived  from  verbs  by  an  ad 
dition  of  the  termination  able.  Some  of 
thefe  are  reftored  to  their  analogy  ;  others 
retain  the  accent  on  the  firft  fyllable. 

NOTWITHSTANDING  the  authority  of 
Sheridan,  I  prefume  few  people  will  con 
tend  for  the  privelege  of  accenting  accept 
able  on  the  firft  fyllable.  How  the  organs 
of  any  man  can  be  brought  to  articulate 
fo  many  confonants  in  the  weak  fyllables, 
or  how  the  ear  can  relifh  fuch  an  unnatu 
ral  pronunciation,  is  almoft  inconceivea- 
ble.  In  fpite  of  the  pedantry  of  fchol- 
ars,  the -cafe,  and  melody  of  fpeaking,  have 
almoft  wholly  banifhfcd  the  abfurd  prac 
tice,  by  reftoring  the  accent  to  the  fecond 
fyllable. 

BUT  with  refpe£t  to  .admirable,  compara 
ble  and  dif put  able  i  the  authors  who  are 
deemed  authorities  are  divided  ;  fome  are 
in  favor  of  the  accent  on  the  firft  fyllable, 
and  others  adhere  to  analogy. 

SETTING  afide  cuftom,  every  reafon  for 
accenting  thefe  words  on  the  firft  fyliable, 
apply  with  equal  force  to  advifeable^ 

inclineable^ 


DISSERTATION    III. 


inclineable,  requireable,  and  a  hundred  oth 
ers.  They  are  all  formed  from  verbs  ao 
cented  on  the  laft  fyllable,  by  annexing  the 
fame  termination  to  the  verb,  and  they  are 
all  of  the  fame  part  of  fpeech.  Let  us  exam-* 
in  them  by  the  rules  for  accentuation,  laid 
down  in  the  preceding  diflfertation. 

THE  primitive  verbs  of  this  clafs  of 
words  are  ufually  compounded  of  a  parti 
cle  and  principal  part  of  fpeech  ;  as  ad-mi~ 
ro,  com-paroy  re~qu<xroy  &c.  The  laft  fyl 
lable,  derived  from  a  verb,  is  the  moft  im 
portant,  and  in  the  primitives,  is  invaria 
bly  accented.  This  is  agreeable  to  the  firft 
rule.  In  nine  tenths  of  the  derivatives, 
the  fame  fyllable  retains  the  accent  ;  as, 
perceive  able  i  available,  deplore  able.  In  thefe 
therefore  both  rules  are  obferved.  The 
third  rule,  or  that  which  arifes  from  the 
terminating  fyllable,  is  alfo  preferred  in 
moft  of  this  clafs  of  words.  It  is  there 
fore  much  to  be  regretted,  that  a  falfe  rule 
fliould  have  introduced  an  irregularity  in 
to  the  language,  by  excepting  a  few  words 
from  an  analogy,  which  unites  in  itfelf  ev 
ery  principle  of  propriety. 

BUT  the  praftice,  with  refpeft  to  the 
three  words  under  conlideration,  is  by  no 
means  general,  I  have  taken  particular 

notice 


DISSERTATION    III.      141 

notice  of  the  pronunciation  of  people  in 
every  part  of  America,  and  can  teftify  that, 
in  point  of  numbers,  the  praftice  is  in  fa*> 
vor  of  analogy.  The  people  at  large  fay 
admi'reabk)  dlfpu'teable^  ccmpa'reable  ;  and 
it  would  be  difficult  to  lead  them  from  this 
eafy  and  natural  pronunciation,  to  em 
brace  that  forced  one  of  admirable^  &c* 
The  people  are  right,  and,  in  this  particu 
lar,  will  ever  have  it  to  boaft  of,  that  among 
the  unlearned  is  found  the  purity  of  Eng- 
lifh  pronunciation, 

OF  this  elafs  of  words,  there  are  a  few 
which  feem  to  be  corrupted  in  univerfal 
pra6lice  ;  as  reputable.  The  reafon  why  the 
accent  in  this  word  is  more  generally  con 
firmed  on  the  firft  fy  liable,  may  be  this  > 
there  is  but  a  fmgle  cqnfonant  between  the 
firft  and  fecond  fyllable,  and  another  be 
tween  the  fecond  and  third  ;  fo  that  the 
pronunciation  of  the  three  weak  fyllables  is 
by  no  means  difficult.  This  word  therefore, 
in  which  all  authors,  and  as  far  as  I  know, 
all  men,  agree  to  lay  the  accent  on  the  firft 
fyllable,  and  the  orthography  of  which  ren 
ders  the  pronunciation  eafy,  muft  perhaps  be 
admitted  as  an  exception  to  the  general  rule.* 


*  IT  is  regretted  that  the  acfjeftives,  indi/bhtblt,  irreparable 
derived  immediately  from  the  Latin,  indi/olubilis,  ir- 


142      DISSEPvTATION    IIL 


or  acceffbry*  are  differently 
cented  by  the  beft  writers  and  fpeakers 
But  the  eafe  of  fpeaking  requires  that  they 
fhould  follow  the  rule  of  derivation,  and 
retain  the  accent  of  the  primitive,  accefiary. 

THE  fafhionable  pronunciation  of  fuch 
words  as  immediate,,  minifterial,  commodious, 
is  liable  to  particular  exceptions.  That  / 
has  a  liquid  found,  like  y,  in  many  words 
in  our  language,  is  not  difputed  ;  but  the, 
claffes  of  words  which  will  admit  this 
found,  ought  to  be  afcertained.  It  appears 
to  me  that  common  praftice  has  determin 
ed  this  point.  If  we  attend  to  the  pronun 
ciation  of  the  body  of  people,  who  are 
led  by  their  own  eafe  -rather  than  by  a  nice 
regard  to  fafhion,  we  fliall  find  that  they 

make 

reparafiitts,  and  not  from  the  Englifh  verbs,  diflblvc,  repair. 
Yet  diffolvable,  indiffolvable,  repairable,  and  impair  obit)  arc 
better  words  than  inJiffolabk,  reparable,  irreparable.  They 
not  only  preferve  the  analogy,  but  they  are  more  purely 
Englifh  words  ;  and  I  have  been  witnefs  to  a  circumftance 
which  alone  ought  to  determine  their  excellence  and  give 
them  currency  :  People  of  ordinary  education  have  found 
difficulty  in  underftanding  fuch  derivatives  as  irreparable. 
indiffuliblz  ;  but  the  moment  the  words  impair  able,  indif- 
Jolveable  are  pronounced,  they  are  led  to  the  meaning  by  a 
previous  acquaintance  with  the  words  repair  and  dijjolve. 
Numbciicfs  examples  of  this  \vill  occur  to  a  perfon  of  ob- 
fervaticn,  fufficicnt  to  make  him  abhor  and  rejeft  the  pe 
dantry  of  authors,  who  have  labored  to  ftrip  their  native 
tongue  of  its  primitive  Englifh  drei's,  and  load  it  with  fan- 
taflic  ornaments. 


DISSERTATION     III.       143 

make  /  liquid,  or  give  it  the  found  of  y  con 
fonant,  after  thofe  confonants  only,  which 
admit  that  found  without  any  change  of 
their  own  powers.  Thefe  confonants  are 
/,  ;/,  vy  and  the  double  confonant  x  ;  as 
valiant,  companion,  behavior,  flexion.  Here 
y  might  be  fubftit&ted  for  />  without  any 
change,  or  any  tendency  to  a  change,  of 
the  preceding  confonant  ,  except  perhaps 
the  change  of  Ji  inflexion  into/6,  which  is 
a  general  rule  in  the  language,  as  it  is  to 
change  ti  and  ci  into  the  fame  found.* 

BUT  when  /  is  preceded  by  d,  change  it 
into  y,  and  we  cannot  pronounce  it  with 
our  ufual  rapidity,  without  blending  the 
two  letters  into  the  found  of  j,  which  is  a 
compound  of  dzh  ;  at  leaft  it  cannot  be  ef- 
fe6led  without  a  violent  exertion  of  the 
fpeaker.  Immedyate  is  fo  difficult,  that  ev 
ery  perfon  who  attempts  to  pronounce  it 
in  that  manner,  will  fall  into  immejate. 
Thus  commodious*  comedian,  tragedian,  are 
very  politely  pronounced  commojus,  come- 
jan,  trajejan.  Such  a  pronunciation,  chang 
ing  the  true  powers  of  the  letters,  and  in 
troducing  a  harih  union  of  confonants, 

dzh, 

*  FLEXION  refolved  into  its  proper  letters  would  be 
Jlekfon,  that  isfakfiun  \  and  f.t,ks-\un  would  give  the  iarna 
lound. 


H4      DISSERTATION    III. 

dxh,  in  the  place  of  the  fmooth  found  of 
dia,  muft  be  confidered  as  a  palpable  cor* 
ruption* 

WITH  refpeft  to  the  terminations  tat, 
Ian,  &c.  after  r,  I  muft  believe  it  impoffi-* 
ble  to  blend  thefe  letters  in  one  fyllable. 
In  the  word  minifterial,  for  example,*  I  can 
not  conceive  how  ial  can  be  pronounced 
yal,  without  a  paufe  after  the  fyllables, 
mintfter-.  Sheridan's  manner  of  pronoun 
cing  the  letters  ryan,  ryal,  in  a  fyllable,  ap 
pears  to  be  a  grofs  abfurdity  :  Even  allow 
ing  y  to  have  the  found  of  e,  we  muft  of 
neceffity  articulate  two  fyllables. 

BUT  fuppofing  the  modern  pronuncia 
tion  of  immediate  to  be  liable  to  none  of 
thefe  exceptions,  there  is  another  objeftion 
to  it,  arifing  from  the  conftruftion  of  our 
poetry.  To  the  fhort  fyllables  of  fuch 
words  as  every ',  glorious,  different,  bowery, 
commodious,  harmonious,  happier,  ethereal, 
immediate,  experience,  our  poetry  is  in  a 
great  meafure  indebted  for  the  Daffyl,  the 
Amphibrach,  and  the  Anapceft,  feet  which 
are  neceflfary  to  give  variety  to  verification, 
and  the  laft  of  which  is  the  moft  flowing, 
melodious  and  forceable  foot  in  the  lan 
guage.  By  blending  the  two  fhort  fylla 
bles 


DISSERTATION    III.      145 

bles  into  one,  we  make  the  foot  an  Iambic ; 
and  as  our  poetry  confifts  principally  of 
iambics,  we  thus  reduce  our  heroic  verfe 
to  a  dull  uniformity.,  Take  for  example 
the  following  line  of  Pope. 

«THAT  fees  immediate  good  by  prefent  fenfe"— 

IF  we  pronounce  it  thus  : 

THAT  fees  |  inline  | jate1  good  |  by  pref  j  ent  lenfe  ; 

the  line  will  be  compofed  entirely  of  Iam 
bics.  But  read  it  thus  : 

THAT  fees  |  mime  |di-ate  good  [  by  pref |  ent  fenfe  ; 

and  the  third  foot,  becoming  an  anapseft^ 
gives  variety  to  the  verfe* 

IN  the  following  line  ; 

"  SOME  happier  ifland  in  the  watery  wafte  :" 

If  we  read  happier  and  <watry,  as  words 
of  two  fyllables,  the  feet  will  all  be  Iam 
bics,  except  the  third,  which  is  a  Pyrrhic. 
But  if  we  read  happier  and  watery,*  in  three 
fyllables,  as  we  ought,  we  introduce  two 
anapaeils,  and  give  variety  and  flowing 
melody  to  the  verfe. 

THESE 

*  To  an  ignorance  of  the  laws  of  verification ,  we  muft 
afcribe  the  unwarrantable  contra&ion  of  watery,  wvnderous, 
&c.  into  ztiatry,  wondrous. 

K 


246      DISSERTATION    III. 

THESE  remarks  will  be  more  fully  con 
firmed  by  attending  to  the  laft  verfe  of  the 
following  diftich  : 

«  IN  martial  pomp  he  clothes  the  angelic  train, 
While  warring  myr  |  iads  fhake  |  the  ethe  |  rial  plain." 

Philofophic  Solitude. 

ON  Sheridan's  principles,  and  by  an  elif- 
ion  of  e  in  the,  the  laft  line  is  compofed  of 
pure  Iambics ;  whereas  in  fa£t,  the  three 
laft  feet  are  anapaefts  ;  and  to  thefe  the 
verfe  is,  in  fome  meafure,  indebted  for  its 
melody  and  the  fublimity  of  the  defcrip- 
tion. 

THESE  confutations  are  direfikly  oppof- 
ed  to  the  fafhionable  pronunciation  of  im 
mediate,  and  that  whole  analogy  of  words. 
In  addition  to  this,  I  may  remark,  that  it  is 
not  the  practice  of  people  in  general.  What 
ever  may  be  the  charcter  and  rank  of  its 
advocates,  in  this  country  they  compofe 
but  a  fmall  part,  even  of  the  literati. 

Of  MODERN  CORRUPTIONS   in  the 
ENGLISH  PRONUNCIATION. 

I  PROCEED    now  to  exarnin  a  mode 
of  pronouncing  certain  words,  which  pre 
vails  in  England  and  fome  parts  of  Amer 
ica, 


DISSERTATION  HI. 


ka,  and  which,  as  it  extends  to  a  vaft  num 
ber  of  words,  and  creates  a  material  differ 
ence  between  the  orthography  and  pro 
nunciation,  is  a  matter  of  ferious  confe- 
quence. 

To  attack  eftabliflied  cufioms  is  always 
hazardous  5  for  mankind,  even  when  they 
fee  and  acknowlege  their  errors,  are  feldorn 
obliged  to  the  man  wlio  expofes  them^ 
The  danger  is  encreafed,  when  an  oppofi- 
tion  is  made  to  the  favorite  opinions  of  the 
great  ;  for  men,  whole  rank  and  abilities 
entitle  them  to  particular  refpeft,  will 
fooner  difmifs  their  friends  than  their  prej 
udices*  Under  this  conviction,  my  pref- 
ent  fituation  is  delicate  and  embarraffing  : 
But  as  fome  facrifices  muft  often  be  made 
to  truth  ;  and  as  I  am  confcious  that  a  re 
gard  to  truth  only  dictates  what  I  write,  I 
can  iincerely  declare,  it  is  my  wifh  to 
inform  the  underftanding  of  every  man, 
without  wounding  the  feelings  of  an  indi 
vidual. 

THE  practice  to  which  I  allude,  is  that 
of  pronouncing  d,  t,  and  s  preceding  u  ; 
which  letter,  it  is  faid,  contains  the  found 
of  e  or  y  and  oo  ;  and  that  of  courfe  edu 
cation  muft  be  pronounced  education  ;  na~ 
K  2  ture> 


148      DISSERTATION    III. 

ture,  natyure  5  an&fuperior,Jyuperior :  From 
the  difficulty  of  pronouncing  which,  we 
naturally  fall  into  the  found  of  dzh,  tjhy 
and  Jh  :  Thus  education  becomes  edzhy- 
cation  or  education  ;  nature  becomes  natfoure 
or  nachure  ;  and  fuperior  becomes  Jhupe 
rior. 

How  long  this  practice  has  prevailed  in 
London,  I  cannot  afcertain.  There  are  a 
few  words,  in  which  it  feems  to  have  been 
univerfal  from  time  immemorial;  as, />/<?#- 
Jure,  and  the  other  words  of  that  analogy. 
But  I  find  no  reafon  to  fuppofe  the  pra£lice 
of  pronouncing  nature,  duty,  nachure,  juty, 
prevailed  before  the  period  of  Garrick's 
reputation  on  the  ftage. 

ON  the  other  hand,  the  writers  on  the 
language  have  been  filent  upon  this  point, 
till  within  a  few  years  ;  and  Kenrick  fpeaks 
of  it  as  a  Metropolitan  pronunciation,  fup- 
ported  by  certain  mighty  fine  fpeakers,* 
which  implies  that  the  praftice  is  modern, 
and  proves  it  to  be  local,  even  in  Great 
Britain.  But  the  praftice  has  prevailed  at 
court  and  on  the  ftage  for  feveral  years,  and 
the  reputation  of  a  Garrick,  a  Sheridan 

and 

*  Rhetorical  Grammar,  prefixed  to  his  Dictionary,  page 
02.*"  London,  1/73. 


DISSERTATION    III.       149 

and  a  Siddons,  has  given  it  a  very  rapid 
"and  extenfive  diftufion  in  the  polite  world. 
As  the  innovation  is  great  and  extends  to 
a  multitude  of  words,  it  is  neceffary,  before 
we  embrace  the  practice  in  its  utmoft  lati 
tude,  to  examin  into  its  propriety  and  con- 
fequences. 

tr    ' 

THE  only  reafons  offered  in  fupport  of 
the  praftice,  are,  the  EngUfh  or  Saxon 
found  of  #,  which  is  faid  to  be  yu  ;  and 
euphony,  or  the  agreeablemefs  of  the  pro 
nunciation. 

BUT  permit  me:  to  enquire,  on  what  do 
the  advocates  of  this  praftice  ground  their 
affertion,  that  u  had  in  Saxon  the  found  of 
eu  or  yu  ?  Are  there  any  teftimonies  to 
fupport  it,  among  old  writers  of  authori 
ty  ?  In  the  courfe  of  my  reading  I  have 
difcovered  none,  nor  have  I  ever  feen  one 
produced  or  referred  to. 

WILL  it  be  faid,  that  yu  is  the  name  of 
the  letter  ?  But  where  did  this  name  orig 
inate  ?  Certainly  not  in  the  old  Saxon 
praftice,  for  the  Saxons  expreffed  this  found 
by  ewy  or  eo :  And  I  do  not  recolleft  a  fm- 
gle  word  of  Saxon  origin,  in  which  the 
warmeft  fticklers  for  the  praftice,  give  u 
K  3  this 


DISSERTATION    III. 


this  found,  even  in  the  prefent  age.  Ken- 
rick,  who  has  invefligated  the  powers  of 
the  Englifh  letters  with  much  more  accu 
racy  than  even  Sheridan  himfelf,  obferves, 
that  we  might  with  equal  propriety,  name 
the  other  vowels  in  the  fame  manner,  and 
fay,  ya,  ye,  yi,yo,  as  well  as  yu.* 

U  IN  union,  ufe>  &c.  has  the  found  of  yu  ; 
but  thefe  are  all  of  Latin  origin,  and  can 
be  no  proof  that  u  had,  in  Saxon,  the  found 
of  eyv  or  yu. 

THE  whole  argument  is  founded  on  a  mif- 
take.  U  in  pure  Englifh  has  not  the  found 
of  ew  ;  but  a  found  that  approaches  it  $ 
which  is  defined  with  great  accuracy  by  the 
learned  Wallis,  who  was  one  of  the  firft 
correft  writers  upon  Englifh  Grammar, 
and  wrhofe  treatife  is  the  foundation 
of  Lowth's  Introduction  and  all  the  beft 
fubfequent  compilations.  -f« 

THIS  writer  defines  the  Englifh  letter 
u  in  thefe  words,  "  Hunc  fonum  Extranei 
fere  "aflequenter,  fi  dipthongun}  iu  co- 

nentur 

*RHET.  Gram.  33, 

t'His  grammar  was  written  in  Latin,  in  the  reign  of 
Phai  les  lid.  1  he  work  is  lo  icaice,  that  1  have  never  beep 
able  to  find  but  a  fingle  copy.  The  author  was  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  Royai  Society, 


DISSERTATION    III.       151 

nentur  pronunciare  5  nempe  /  exile  liters 
#,  vel  w  preponentes ;  (ut  in  Hifpanorum 
ciudad,  ci vitas.)  N on  t  amen  idem  eft  omnino 
fonus  iquamvis,  adillumproxime,  accedat ;  eft 
enim  iu  fonus  compofitus,  at  Anglorum  et 
Gallorum  u  fonus  fimplqx."*— — Gram. 
Ling.  Angl.  Se£t.  2, 

THIS  is  precifely  the  idea  I  have  ever  had 
of  the  Englifh  u  ;  except  that  I  cannot  al 
low  the  found  to  be  perfectly  iimple.  If 
we  attend  to  the  manner  in  which  we  be 
gin  the  found  of  u  in  flute,  abjure^  truth  >  we 
fhall  obferve  that  the  tongue  is  not  preffed 
to  the  mouth  fo  clofely  as  in  pronouncing 
e ;  the  aperture  of  the  organs  is  not  fo 
fmall  ;  and  I  prefume  that  good  fpeakers, 
and  am  confident  that  moft  people,  do  not 
pronounce  thefe  words JJcute,  abjeure,  treuth. 
Neither  do  they  pronounce  \hzmjhote,  ab- 
joore,  trooth  ;  but  with  a  found  formed  by  an 
eafy  natural  aperture  of  the  mouth,  between 
iu  and  oo ;  which  is  the  true  Englifh  found. 
This  found,  however  obfcured  by  affefta- 
tion  in  the  metropolis  of  Great  Britain  and 

the 

0 

THIS  found  of  M,  foreigners  will  nearly  obtain,  by  at 
tempting  to  pronounce  the  dipthong  iu  ;  that  is,  the  narrow 
£  before  u  or  w  ;  fas  in  the  Spanifri  word  ciudad,  a  city.) 
Yet  the  found  (ot  u)  is  not  exa&ly  the  lame,  altho  it  apr 
proaches  very  near  to  it ;  for  the  found  of  iu  is  compound  ; 
V/hereas  the  u  of  the  Englifh  and  French  is  a  fimplc  found," 


DISSERTATION    III. 

the  capital  towns  in  America,  is  ftill  pre* 
ferved  by  the  body  of  the  people  in  both 
countries.  There  are  a  million  defcend- 
ants  of  the  Saxons  in  this  country  who  re 
tain  the  found  of  u  in  all  cafes,  precifely 
according  to  Wallis's  definition.  Aik  any 
plain  countryman,  whofe  pronunciation 
has  not  been  expofed  to  corruption  by 
mingling  with  foreigners,  how  he  pro 
nounces  the  letters,  f,  r,  u,  th,  and  he  will 
not  found  u  like  cu>  nor  00,  but  will  exprefs 
the  real  primitive  Englifh  u.  Nay,  if  peo 
ple  \vifh  to  make  an  accurate  trial,  let  them 
aireft  any  child  of  feven  years  old,  who 
has  had  no  previous  inftruftion  refpe<5ting 
the  matter,  to  pronounce  the  words  fait* 
tumult^  due*  &c.  and  they  will  thus  afcer- 
tain  the  true  found  of  the  letter,  Children 
pronounce  u  in  the  moft  natural  manner  ; 
whereas  the  found  of  iu  requires  a  confid- 
erable  effort,  and  that  of  00,  a  forced  pofi- 
tion  of  the  lips.  Illiterate  perfons  there 
fore  pronounce  the  genuin  Englifti  u,  much 
better  than  thofe  who  have  attempted  to. 
fhape  their  pronunciation  according  to  the 
polite  modern  practice.  As  fmgular  as 
this  affertion  may  appear,  it  is  literally 
true.  This  circumftance  alone  would  be 
fufficient  to  prove  that  the  Saxons  never 
pronounced  u  like  yu  }  for  the  body  of  a 

jiation* 


DISSERTATION    III.       i5j 

nation,  removed  from  the  reach  of  con* 
queft  and  free  from  a  mixture  of  foreign 
ers,  are  the  fafeft  repositories  of  ancient 
cuftoms  and  general  praftice  in  fpeaking, 

BUT  another  ftrong  argument  againft 
the  modern  practice  is,  that  the  pretended 
dipthong,  iu  or  yu,  is  heard  in  fcarcely  a 
fmgle  word  of  Saxon  origin.  Almoft  all 
the  words  in  which  dy  t  ahdy*  are  convert 
ed  into  other  letters,  as  education^  due,  vir- 
tue^  rapture,,  fuperior,  fupreme^  &c.  are  de 
rived  from  the  Latin  or  French  -y  fo  that 
the  praflice  itfelf  is  a  proof  that  the  prin 
ciples  on  which  it  is  built,  are  falfe.  It  is 
pretended  that  the  Englifh  or  Saxon  found 
of  u  requires  the  pronunciation,  edzhuca- 
tiony  natjhure,>  and  yet  it  is  introduced  aU 
moft  folely  into  Latin  and  .French  words. 
Such  an  inconfiltency  refutes  the  reafpning 
and  is  a  burlefque  on  its  advocates. 

THIS  however  is  but  a  fmall  part  of  the 
mconfiftency.  In  two  other  particulars 
the  abfurdity  is  ftill  more  glaring. 

i.  THE  modern  refiners  of  our  language 
diftinguiili  two  founds  of  u  long  ;  that  of 
yu  and  oo  -,  and  life  both  without  any  re-r 
to  Latin  or  Saxon  derivation.  Thq 


154      DISSERTATION    III. 

diftinftion  they  make  is  founded  on  a  cer 
tain  principle  •>  and  yet  I  queftion  whether 
one  of  a  thoufand  of  them  ever  attend 
ed  to  it.  After  moft  of  the  confonants, 
they  give  n  the  dipthongal  found  of  eu  -, 
as  in  blue,  cube,  due,  mute ;  but  after  r  they 
almoft  invariably  pronounce  it  oo  ;  as  rule, 
truth,  rue,  rude,  fruit.  Why  this  diftinc- 
tion  ?  If  they  contend  for  the  Saxon  found 
of  u,  why  do  they  not  preferve  that  found 
in  true,  rue,  'truth,  which  are  of  Saxon  o- 
riginal  ;  and  uniformly  give  u  its  Roman 
found,  which  is  acknowleged  on  all  hands  to 
have  been  co,  in  all  words  of  Latin  original, 
as  rule,  mute,  cube  ?  The  fact  is,  they  mit- 
take  the  principle  on  which  the  diftin£tion 
is  made  ;  and  which  is  merely  accidental, 
or  arifes  from  the  eafe  of  fpeaking, 

IN  order  to  frame  many  of  the  confonants, 
the  organs  are  placed  in  fuch  a  pofition, 
that  in  paffing  from  it  to  the  aperture  nec- 
effary  to  articulate  the  following  vowel  or 
dipthong,  we  infenfibly  fall  into  the  found 
of  ee.  This  in  particular  is  the  cafe  with 
thofe  confonants  which  are  formed  near 
the  feat  of  e\  viz.  k  and  g.  The  clofing 
of  the  organs  forms  thefe  mutes ;  and  a  very 
f  mall  opening  forms  the  vowel  e.  In  pafl- 
ing  from  that  £iofe  comprefjion  qccafioned 


DISSERTATION    HI.       155 

by  k  and  g,  to  the  aperture  neceflary  to 
form  any  vowel,  the  organs  are  neceffarily 
placed  in  a  fituation  to  pronounce  ee.  From 
this  fingle  circumftance,  have  originated 
the  moft  barbarous  dialefts  or  fingularities 
in  fpeaking  Englifli,  which  offend  the  ear, 
either  in  Great  Britain  or  America. 

THIS  is  the  origin  of  the  New  England 
keowy  keoward ;  and  of  the  Englifh  keube^ 
ackeufe^  keind  and  geuide. 

THERE  is  juft  the  fame  propriety  in  one 
pra6lice  as  the  other,  and  both  are  equally 
harmonious. 

FOR  fimilar  reafons,  the  labials,  m 
and  />,  are  followed  by  e :  In  New  Eng 
land,  we  hear  it  in  meow,  peower,  ,  and 
in  Great  Britain,  in  meutey  peure.  With 
this  difference  however,  that  in  New  Eng 
land,  this  pronunciation  is  generally  con 
fined  to  the  more  illiterate  part  of  the  peo 
ple,  and  in  Great  Britain  it  prevails  among 
thofe  of  the  firft  rank.  But  after  r  we 
never  hear  the  found  of  e  :  It  has  been  be 
fore  obferved,  that  the  moft  awkward  coun 
tryman  in  New  England  pronounces  round^ 
.  ground^  brown,  as  correftly  as  men  of  the 
firfl  education  ;  and  our  fafhionable  fpeak- 
ers  pronounce  u  after  r  like  oo.  The  rea-? 

fQU 


156      DISSERTATION    III. 

fon  is  the  fame  in  both  cafes  :  In  pronoun 
cing  r  the  mouth  is  neceflarily  opened  (or 
rather  the  glottis)  to  a  pofition  for  articu- 
latifig  a  broad  full  found.  So  that  the  vul 
gar  fmgularities  in  this  refpeft,  and  the  po 
lite  refinements  of  fpeaking,  both  proceed 
from  the  fame  caufe  -,  both  proceed  from 
an  accidental  or  carelefs  narrow  way  of 
articulating  certain  combinations  of  letters; 
both  are  corruptions  of  pure  Englifh  ;  e- 
qually  difagreeable  and  indefenfible.  Both 
may  be  eafily  corrected  by  taking  more 
pains  to  open  the  teeth,  and  form  full  bold 
founds, 

2.  BUT  another  inconfiftency  in  the 
modern  practice,  is  the  introducing  an  e* 
before  the  fecond  found  of  u  as  in  tun  ;  or 
rather  changing  the  preceding  confonant ; 
for  in  nature^  rapture^  and  hundreds  of 
other  words,  t  is  changed  into  tjh  ;  and  yet 
no  perfon  pretends  that  u,  in  thefe  words, 
has  a  dipthongal  found.  On  the  other 
hand,  Sheridan  and  his  copier,  Scott,  have 

in 

*  *LOWTH  condemns  fuch  a  phrafe  as,  <£  the  introducing  an 
c"  and  fays  it  fhould  be,  "  the  introducing  of'  an  e."  This  is 
but  one  inflance  of  a  great  number,  in  which  he  has  re- 
je6led  good  Englifh.  In  this  fituation,  introducing  is  a  parr 
ticipial  noun  ;  it  may  take  an  article  before  it,  like  any  other 
noun,  and  yet  govern  an  objcclive,  like  any  tranfitive  verb. 
This  is  the  idiom  of  the  language:  but  in  mofl  cafes,  the 
y/rit$r  may  ufe  or  omit  of,  at  pleafure< 


DISSERTATION    III.      157 

in  thefe  and  fimilar  words  marked  u  for  its 
fliort  found,  which  is  univerfally  acknowl- 
eged  to  be  fimple.  I  believe  no  perfon 
ever  pretended,  that  this  found  of  u  con 
tains  the  found  of  e  or  y  3  why  then  fhould 
we  be  direfted  to  pronounce  nature,  nat* 
yur  ?  Or  what  is  equally  abfurd,  natjhur  ? 
On  what  principle  is  the  t  changed  into  a 
compound  confonant  ?  If  there  is  any  thing 
in  this  found  of  u  to  warrant  this  change, 
does  it  not  extend  to  all  words  where  this 
found  occurs  ?  Why  do  not  our  flandard 
writers  direft  us  to  fay  tfhun  for  tun,  and 
tJJmmble  for  tumble  ?  I  can  conceive  no  rea 
fon  which  will  warrant  the  pronunciation 
in  one  cafe,  that  will  not  apply  with  equal 
force  in  the  other*  And  I  challenge  the 
advocates  of  the  practice,  to  produce  a 
reafon  for  pronouncing  natjhur,  raptjhur, 
captjkur,  which  will  not  extend  to  author 
ize,  not  only  tjhun,  tjhurn,  for  tun,  turn,  but 
tf&tfatjhal  IQV  fatal,  and  immortfhal  for  im~ 
mortal*  Nay,  the  latter  pronunciation  is 
actually  heard  among  fome  very  refpecta- 
ble  imitators  of  faihion  ;  and  is  frequent 


among 


*  I  MUST  except  that  reafon,  which  is  always  an  invinc 
ible  argument  with  weak  people,  viz.  «  It  is  the  praftice  of 
fome  great  men."  This  common  argument,  which  is  unan- 
fwerable,  will  alfo  prove  the  propriety  of  imitating  all  the 
polite  and  deteftable  vices  of  the  great,  which  are  now  un 
known  to  the  little  vulgar  of  this  country. 


158      DISSERTATION    HL 

among  the  illiterate,  in  thofe  ftates  where 
the  f/kus  are  moft  fafhionable.  How  can. 
it  be  otherwife  ?  People  are  led  by  imita 
tion  -,  and  when  thofe  in  high  life  embrace 
a  fingularity,  the  multitude,  who  are  un 
acquainted  with  its  principles  or  extent, 
will  attempt  to  imitate  the  novelty,  and 
probably  carry  it  much  farther  than  was 
ever  intended. 

WHEN  a  man  of  little  education  hears 
a  refpe6lable  gentleman  change  t  into  t/b 
in  nature,  he  will  naturally  be  led  to  change 
the  fame  letter,  not  only  in  that  word,  but 
wherever  it  occurs.  This  is  already  done 
in  a  multitude  of  inftances,  and  the  prac 
tice  if  continued  and  extended,  might  e-* 
ventually  change  /,  in  all  cafes,  into  tjb. 

I  AM  fenfible  that  fome  writers  of  nov 
els  and  plays  have  ridiculed  the  common 
pronunciation  of  creaiur  and  nutur^  by  in 
troducing  thefe  and  fimilar  words  into  low 
charafters,  fpelling  them  creater^  nater  : 
And  the  fupporters  of  the  court  pronunci 
ation  allege,  that  in  the  vulgar  practice  of 
fpeaking,  the  letter  e  is  founded  and  not  u  : 
So  extremely  ignorant  are  they  of  the  na 
ture  of  founds  and  the  true  powers  of  the 
Englifh  letters*  The  faft  is,  we  are  fo  far 

from 


DISSERTATION    III. 


from  pronouncing  e  in  the  common  pro 
nunciation  of  natur,  creatur,  &c.  that  e  is 
always  founded  like  fhort  u,  in  the  unac 
cented  fyllables  of  over,  fiber,  banter,  and 
other  fimilar  words.  Nay,  moft  of  the 
vowels,  in  fuch  fyllables,  found  like  /  or  u 
fhort.*  Liar,  elder,  faftor,  are  pronoun 
ced  liur,  eldur,  faffur,  and  this  is  the  true 
found  of  u  in  creatur  ^  nature  ',  rapture  -,  legif- 
lature,  &c. 

I  WOULD  juft  obferve  further,  that  this 
.pretended  dipthong  iu  was  formerly  ex- 
prefled  by  ew  and  eu,  or  perhaps  by  eoy  and 
was  confidered  as  different  from  the  found 
of  u.  In  modern  times,  we  have,  in  many 
words,  blended  the  found  of  u  with  that  of 
ewy  or  rather  ufe  them  promifcuoufly.  It 
is  indifferent,  as  to  the  pronunciation, 
whether  we  write  fuel  or  fewel.  And  yet 
in  this  word,  as  alfo  in  new,  brew,  &c.  we 
do  not  hear  the  found  of  e,  except  among 
the  Virginians,  who  affeft  to  pronounce 
it  diftinftly,  ne-ew,  ne-oo,  fe-oo.  This  af- 
feftation  is  not  of  modern  date,  for  Wai- 

lis 

*  ASH  obferves,  that  {t  in  unaccented,  fhort  and  insignifi 
cant  fyllables,  the  founds  of  the  five  vowels  are  nearly  coin 
cident.  It  muft  be  a  nice  ear  that  can  diftinguifh  the  dif 
ference  of  found  in  the  concluding  fyllable  of  the  following 
words,  altar,  alter,  manor,  murmur,  iatyr."  -  Gram,  'Difi, 
pref,  to  Die.  p.  i, 


i6o  .   DISSERTATION    ill. 

Us  mentions  it  in  his  time  and  reprobates  it. 
"  Eu,  ew,  eau,  ibnanter  per  e  clarum  et 
*w  -,  ut  in  neuter,  jew,  beauty.  Quidem  ta- 
men  accutius  efferunt,  acfi  fcriberentur 
niew  tery  flew,  bieuty.  At  prior  pronunci^ 
atio  redlior  eft." Gram.  Ling.  Ang, 

HERE  this  author  allows  thefe  combina 
tions  to  have  the  found  of  yu  or  iu  ;  but 
difapproves  of  that  refinement  which  fome 
affeft,  in  giving  the  e  or  /  fhort  its  diftinft 
found. 

THE  tnie  found  of  the  Englifh  u,  is  nei-» 
ther  ew,  with  the  diftinft  founds  of  e  and 
oo  -,  nor  is  it  oo  ;  but  it  is  that  found  which 
every  unlettered  perfon  utters  in  pronoun 
cing  foil tude  *  rude,  threw,  and  which  cannot 
eafily  be  miftakeii*  So  difficult  is  it  to  a^ 
void  the  true  found  of  u,  that  I  have  never 
found  a  man,  even  among  the  ardent  ad 
mirers  of  the  ftage  pronunciation,  who 
does  not  retain  the  vulgar  found,  in  more 
than  half  the  words  of  this  clafs  which  he 
iifes.  There  is  fuch  a  propenfity  in  men 
to  be  regular  in  the  conftruftion  and  ufe 
of  language,  that  they  are  often  obliged, 
by  the  cuftoms-of  the  age,  to  ftruggle  a- 
gainft  their  inclination,  in  order  to  be 
wrong,  and  ftill  find  it  impoffible  to  be  u- 
niform  in  their  errors.  THE 


DISSERTATION    III.       161 

THE  other  reafon  given  to  vindicate  the 
polite  pronunciation,  is  euphony.  But  I 
muft  fay  with  Kenrick,*  I  cannot  difcover 
the  euphony  ;  on  the  contrary,  the  pro-* 
nunciation  is  to  me  both  difagreeable  and 
difficult*  It  is  certainly  more  difficult  to 
pronounce  two  confonants  than  one.  G&, 
or,  which  is  the  fame  thing,  t/hy  is  a  more 
difficult  found  than  t ;  and  dzh,  ory,  more 
difficult  than  d.  Any  accurate  ear  may 
difcover  the  difference  in  a  fingle  word,  as 
in  natur^  nachur.  But  when  two  or  three 
words  meet,  in  which  we  have  either  of 
thefe  compound  founds,  the  difficulty  be 
comes  very  obvious  ;  as  the  nachural  fea~ 
churs  of  indhnjual:*  The  difficulty  is  in-* 
creafed,  when  two  of  thefe  churs  andjurs  oc 
cur  in  the  fame  word.  Who  can  pro 
nounce 

*  FOR  my  part  I  cannot  difcover  the  euphony  ;  and  t)ir> 
the  contrary  mode  be  reprobated,  as  vulgar,  by  certain 
mighty  fine  fpeakers,  I  think  it  more  conformable  to  the 
general  fcheme  of  Englifh  pronunciation  ;  for  tho  in  order 
to  make  the  word  but  two  fyllables,  £z  and  te  may  be  requir 
ed  to  be  converted  into  ch,  or  the  i  and  «  into  yj  when  the 
preceding  fyllable  is  marked  with  the  accute  accent  as  in 
queftion,  minion,  courteous,  and  the  like  ;  there  feems  to  be 
little  reafon)  when  the  grave  accent  precedes  the  t,  as  in  /?«- 
tur?,  creature,  for  converting  the  t  into  ch  ;  and  not  much 
more  for  joining  the  t  to  the  firft  fyllable  and  introducing  the 
y  before  the  fecond,  as  nat-yure.  Why  the  t  when  followed 
by  neither  '-i  nor  g,  is  to  take  the  form  of  ch,  I  cannot  con-* 
ceive  :  It  is,  in  my  opinion,  a  fpecies  of  affectation  that 

fhould  bs  difcountenanced. -Kenridc.  Rhct.  Gram,  pajfl 

32.   Die. 

L 


DISSERTATION    III. 


nounce  thefe  words,  "  at  this  jun&flmr  it 
*w%scbnje5tfbured"  —  or  cc  the  act  palled  in  a 
tjhumultjhuous  legijlatfiur"  without  a  paufe, 
or  an  extreme  exertion  of  the  lungs  ?  If 
this  is  euphony  to  an  Englifli  ear,  I  know 
not  what  founds  in  language  can  be  difa- 
greeable.  To  me  it  is  barbaroufly  harfli 
and  unharmonious. 

BUT  fuppofing  the  pronunciation  to  be 
relifhed  by  ears  accuftomed  to  it  (for  cuf- 
tom  will  familiarize  any  thing)  will  the 
pleafure  which  individuals  experience,  bal 
ance  the  ill  effefts  of  creating  a  multitude 
of  irregularities  ?  Is  not  the  number  of  a- 
nomalies  in  our  language  already  fufficient> 
without  an  arbitrary  addition  of  many  hun 
dreds  ?  Is  not  the  difference  between  our 
written  and  fpoken  language  already  fuffi- 
ciently  wide,  without  changing  the  founds 
of  a  number  of  confonants  ? 

IF,  we  attend  to  the  irregularities  which 
have  been  long  eftablifhed  in  our  language, 
we  fhall  find  moft  of  them  in  the  Saxon 
branch.  The  Roman  tongue  was  almoft 
perfectly  regular,  and  perhaps  its  orthog 
raphy  and  pronunciation  were  perfectly 
correfpondent.  But  it  is  the  peculiar  mif- 
fortune  of  the  falhionable  pra£lice  of  pro 

nouncing 


It!. 


nouncing  d^  t,  and  fy  before  u,  that  it  de- 
ftroys  the  analogy  and  regularity  of  the 
Roman  branch  of  our  language  ;  for  thofd 
confonants  are  not  changed  in  many  words 
of  Saxon  original.  Before  this  affectation 
prevailed,  we  could  boaft  of  a  regular  or 
thography  in  a  large  brandh  of  our  Ian-* 
guage  ;  but  now  the  only  clafs  of  words, 
which  had  preferred  a  regular  conftruftion , 
are  attacked*  and  the  correfpondence  be 
tween  the  fpelling  and  pronunciation^  de- 
ftroyed,  by  thofe  who  ought  to  have  been 
the  firft  to  oppofe  the  innovation,* 

SHOULD  this  praftice  be  extended  to  all 
words,  where  d,  t  and/  precede  uy  as  it 
muft  before  it  can  be  confident  or  defenfi^ 
ble,  it  would  introduce  more  anomalies 
into  our  tongue,  than  were  before  eftab-* 

lifhed; 

*  WELL  might  Mr.  Sheridan  aflert,  that  "  Such  indeed  is 
the  ftate  of  our  written  language,  that  the  darkeit  hiero 
glyphics,  or  moft  difficult  cyphers  which  the  art  of  man  has 
Hitherto  invented,  were  not  better  calculated  to  conceal  the 
lentiments  of  thofe  who  ufed  them,  from  all  who  had  not 
the  key,  than  the  liiate  of  our  fpellihg  is  to  conceal  the  true 
pronunciation  of  our  words,  from  all,  except  a  few  well 
educated  natives."  Rhet,  Gram.  p.  22.  Die.  But  if  thefe 
well  educated  natives  would  pronounce  words  as  they 
ought,  one  half  the  language  at  leait  would  be  regular.  The 
Latin  derivatives  are  moltly  regular  to  the  educated  and 
uneducated  of  America  ;  and  if  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  mod- 
ciri  hieroglyphical  obfcurity  will  forever  be  confined  to  £ 
few  well  educated  natives  in  Great  Britain* 

La 


1  64      DISSERTATION    III. 

lifhed,  both  in  the  orthography  and  con- 
ftruftion.  What  a  perverted  tafte,  and 
what  a  fingular  ambition  muft  thofe  men 
poffefs,  who,  in  the  day  light  of  civiliza 
tion  and  fcience,  and  in  the  fliort  period  of 
an  age,  can  go  farther  in  demoliihing  the 
analogies  of  an  elegant  language,  than 
their  unlettered  anceftors  proceeded  in  cen 
turies,  amidft  the  accidents  of  a  favage  life, 
and  the  Ihocks  of  numerous  invafions  ! 

BUT  it  will  be  replied,  Cuftom  is  the  leg- 
{/later  of  language  y  and  cuftom  authorizes 
the  practice  I  am  reprobating.  A  man  can 
hardly  offer  a  reafon,  drawn  from  the  prin 
ciples  of  analogy  and  harmony  in  a  lan 
guage,  but  he  is  inftantly  filenced  with  the 
decifive,y#j  et  nor  ma  loquendi.* 

WHAT 


*"OuEM  penes  arbitrium  eft,  et  jus  et  normal  loquen- 
cli."  Horace.  -  u  Nothing,"  fays  Kenrick,  "  has  contrib 
uted  more  to  the  adulteration  of  living  languages,  than  the 
too  extenfive  acceptation  of  Horace's  rule  in  favor  of  cuf 
tom.  Cuftom  is  undoubtedly  the  rule  of  prefent  praftice  ; 
but  there  would  be  no  end  in  following  the  variations  dai 
ly  introduced  by  caprice.  Alterations  may  fometimes  be 
uieful  —  may  be  neccffary  ;  but  they  fhould  be  made  in  a 
manner  conformable  to  the  genius  and  coriflrutlion  of  the 
language.  Modus  eft  in  rebus.  Extremes  in  this,  as  in  all 
other  cafes,  are  hurtful.  We  ought  by  no  means  to  fhut 
the  door  againft  the  improvements  of  our  language  ;  but 
it  were  well  that  fome  criterion  were  eftablifhed  to  diflin- 
guifh  between  improvement  and  innovation."——  Rhet. 
Gram,  page  6,  Di£t. 


DISSERTATION    III.       165 

WHAT  then  is  cuftom  ?  Some  writer 
has  already  anfweredthis  queftion;  £C  Cuf 
tom  is  the  plague  of  wife  men  and  the  idol 
of  fools."  This  was  probably  faid  of  thofe 
cuftoms  and  fafhions  which  are  capricious 
and  varying  ;  for  there  are  many  cuftoms, 
founded  on  propriety,  which  are  perma 
nent  and  conftitute  laws. 

BUT  what  kind  of  cuftom  did  Horace 
defign  to  lay  down  as  the  ftandard  of  fpeak- 
ing  ?  Was  it  a  local  cuftom  ?  Then  the 
keow  of  New  England ;  the  oncet  and  twicet 
of  Pennfylvania  and  Maryland ;  and  the 
keind  andjkey  of  the  London  theaters,  form 
rules  of  fpeaking.  Is  it  the  praftice  of  a 
court,  or  a  few  eminent  fcholars  and  ora 
tors,  that  he  defigned  to  conftitute  a  ftand 
ard  ?  But  who  (hall  determine  what  body 
of  men  forms  this  uncontrollable  legif- 
lature  r  Or  who  lhall  reconcile  the  differ 
ences  at  court  ?  For  thefe  eminent  orators 
often  difagree.  There  are  numbers  of 
words  in  which  the  moft  eminent  men  dif 
fer  :  Can  all  be  right  ?  Or  what,  in  this  cafe, 
is  the  cuftom  which  is  to  be  our  guide  ? 

BESIDES   thefe   difficulties,    what   right 
have  a  few  men,  however  elevated  their  fta- 
tion>  to  change  a  national  practice  ?  They 
L  3  may 


DISSERTATION  in, 


may  fay,  that  they  confult  their  own  ears, 
and  endeavor  to  pleafe  themfelves.  This 
is  their  only  apology,  unlefs  they  can  prove 
that  the  changes  they  make  are  real  im 
provements.  But  what  improvement  is 
there  in  changing  the  founds  of  three  o£ 
four  letters  into  others,  and  thus  multiply  v 
ing  anomalies,  and  encreafmg  the  difV 
ficulty  of  learning  a  language  ?  Will  not 
the  great  body  of  the  people  claim  the 
privilege  of  adhering  to  their  ancient  ufa- 
ges,  and  believing  their  practice  to  be  the 
imoft  correft  ?  They  moft  undoubtedly 
will. 

IF  Horace's  maxim  is  ever  juft,  it  is  on 
ly  when  cuftom  is  national  $  when   the 

Eraftice  of  a  nation  is  uniform  or  general. 
n  this  c$fe  it  becomes  the  common  law  of 
the  land,  and  nt>  one  will  difputc  its  pro 
priety.  But  has  any  man  a.  right  to  devi 
ate  from  this  practice,  and  attempt  to  e- 
ftablifh  a  fingular  mode  of  his  own  ?  Have 
two  or  three  eminent  ftage  players  au 
thority  to  make  changes  at  pleafure,  and 
palm  their  novelties  upon  a  nation  under 
the  idea  of  cuftom  ?  The  reader  will  pardon 
pie  for  tranfcrib.ing  here  the  opinion  of  the 
celebrated  Michaelis,  one  of  the  moft  learn- 
ed  philologers  of  the  prefent  century.  "It 

is 


DISSERTATION    III.       167 

is  not,"  fays  he,  "for  a  fcholarto  give  laws 
nor  profcribe  eftablifhed  expreffions  :  If 
he  takes  fo  much  on  himfelf  he  is  ridiculed, 
and  defervedly  -,  it  is  no  more  than  a  juil 
mortification  to  his  ambition,  and  the  pen 
alty  of  his  ufurping  on  the  rights  of  the 
people.  Language  is  a  democratical  ftate, 
where  all  the  learning  in  the  world  does 
not  warrant  a  citizen  to  fuperfede  a  receiv 
ed  cuftom,  till  he  has  convinced  the  whole 
nation  that  this  cuftom  is  a  miftake.  Schol 
ars  are  not  fo  infallible  that  every  thing  is 
to  be  referred  to  them.  Were  they  allow 
ed  a  decifory  power,  the  errors  of  language, 
I  am  fare,  inftead  of  diminifhing,  would 
be  continually  increafmg.  Learned  heads 
teem  with  them  no  lefs  than  the  vulgar  j 
and  the  former  are  much  more  imperious, 
that  we  fhould  be  compelled  to  defer  to 
their  innovations  and  implicitly  to  receive 
every  falfe  opinion  of  theirs/'* 

YET  this  right  is  often  aflumed  by  in 
dividuals,  who  diftate  to  a  nation  the  rules 
of.fpeaking,  with  the  fame  imperioufnefs 
as  a  tyrant  gives  laws  to  his  vaifals  i  And, 

ftrange 

*  SEE  a  learned  «  DifTertation  on  the  influence  of  o- 
pinions  on  language  and  of  language  on  opinions,  which 
gained  the  prize  of  the  Pruffian  Royal  Academy  in  1759. 
.By  Mr.  Michaelis,  court  councellor  to  his  Britannic  Maj~ 
pfty,  and  director  of  the  Royal  Society  of  Goitingen," 


i6S      DISSERTATION     III. 

ftrange  as  it  may  appear,  even  well  bred 
people  and  fcholars,  often  furrender  their 
right  of  private  judgement  to  thefe  literary 
governors.  The  ipfe  dixit  of  a  Johnfon, 
a  Garrick,  or  a  Sheridan,  has  the  force  of 
law ;  and  to  contradift  it,  is  rebellion.  Aik 
the  moft  of  our  learned  men,  how  they 
would  pronounce  a  word  or  compofe  3  fen- 
tence,  and  they  will  immediately  appeal  to 
fome  favorite  author  whole  decilion  is  fi 
nal.  ^Thus  diftinguifhed  eminence  in  a 
writer  often  becomes  a  pafiport  for  innu 
merable  errors, 

THE  whole  evil  originates  in  a  fallacy. 
It  is  often  fuppoied  that  certain  great  men 
are  infallible,  or  that  their  practice  confti- 
tutes  cuftom-  and  the  rule  of  propriety. 
But  on  the  contrary,  any  man,  however 
learned,  -is.  liable  to  miftake  ;  the  moft 
learned,  as  Michaelis  obferves,  often  teem 
with  errors,  and  not  unfrequently  become 
attached  to  particular  fyftems,  and  imperi 
ous  in  forcing  them  upon  the  world.*  It 
is  not  the  particular  whim  of  fuch  men, 
that  conftitutes  cuftom  >  but  the  common 

practice 

'*  THE  vulgar  thus  by  imitation  err, 
As  oft  the  learn'd  by  being  fingular. 
$o  much  they  {corn  the  croud,  that  if  the  throng, 
By  chance  «o  right,  they  purpcfely  go  wrong." 


DISSERTATION    III.       169 

practice  of  a  nation,  which  is  conformed 
to  their  general  ideas  of  propriety.  The 
pronunciation  of  keow,  keind^  drap^  jutyy 
natjhur,  &c.  are  neither  right  nor, wrong, 
becaufe  they  are  approved  or  cenfured  by 
particular  men  ;  nor  becaufe  one  is  local 
in  New  England,  another  in  the  middle 
ftates,  and  the  others  are  fupported  by  the 
court  and  ftage  in  London.  They  are 
wrong,  becaufe  they  are  oppofed  to  nation 
al  praftice  ;  they  are  wrong,  becaufe  they 
are  arbitrary  or  carelefs  changes  of  the  true 
founds  of  our  letters  ;  they  are  wrong, 
becaufe  they  break  in  upon  the  regular 
conftru6lion  of  the  language  ;  they  are 
wrong,  becaufe  they  render  the  pronunci 
ation  difficult  both  for  natives  and  foreign 
ers  ;  they  are  wrong,  becaufe  they  make 
an  invidious  diftinftion  between  the  polite 
and  common  pronunciation,  or  elfe  oblige 
a  nation  to  change  their  general  cuftoms, 
without  prefenting  to  their  view  one  na 
tional  advantage.  Thefe  are  important 
they  are  permanent  confiderations  ;  they 
are  fuperior  to  the  caprices  of  courts  and 
theaters  ;  they  are  reafons  that  are  inter 
woven  in  the  very  ftruflure  of  the  lan 
guage,  or  founded  on  the  common  law 
of  the  nation  ;  and  they  are  a  living  fat- 
ire  upon  the  licentioufnefs  of  modem 

fpeakers, 


DISSERTATION    III. 


fpeakers,  who  dare  to  flight  their  author* 

ity. 

BUT  let  us  examin  whetljp  the  praftice 
I  am  cenfuring  is  general  or  not  ;  for  if 
not,  it  cannot  come  within  Horace's  rule. 
If  we  may  believe  well  informed  gentle 
men,  it  is  not  general  even  in  Great  Brit 
ain.  I  have  been  perfonally  informed,  and 
by  gentlemen  of  education  and  abilities, 
one  of  whom  was  particular  in  his  obferv- 
ation,  that  it  is  not  general,  even  among 
the  rtioft  eminent  literary  characters  in 
London.  It  is  lefs  frequent  in  the  interi 
or  counties,  where  the  inhabitants  flill 
fpeak  as  the  common  people  do  in  this 
country.  And  Kenrick  fpeaks  of  it  as  an 
affectation  in  the  metropolis  which  ought 
to  be  difcountenanced. 

BUT  whatever  may  be  the  practice  in 
England  or  Ireland,  there  are  few  in  Amer 
ica  who  have  embraced  it,  as  it  is  explained 
in  Sheridan's  Dictionary.  In  the  middle 
and  fouthern  ftates,  there  are  a  few,  and 
thofe  well  bred  people,  who  have  gone  far 
in  attempting  to  imitate  the  faihion  of  the 
day.*  Yet  the  body  of  the  people,  even 

in 

*  THERE  are  many  people,  and  perhaps  the  moftof  them. 
fo  the  capital  towns.  that  have  learnt  a  few  common  place 

words, 


DISSERTATION    III       17* 

in  thefe  ftates,  remain  as  unfafhionable  as 
ever  ;  and  the  eaftern  ftates  generally  acU 
here  to  their  ancient  cuftom  of  fpeaking, 
however  vulgar  it  may  be  thought  by  their 
neighbors.*  Suppofe  cuftom  therefore  to 
be  the  jus  et  norn^a,  the  rule  of  correft 
fpeaking,  and  in  this  country,  it  is  dire6tly 
oppofed  to  the  plan  now  under  confiflera-* 
tion. 

As  a  nation,  we  have  a  very  great  in-* 
tereft  in  oppofing  the  introduftion  of  any 
plan  of  uniformity  with  the  Britifh  lan 
guage,  even  were  the  plan  propofed  per 
fectly  unexceptionable.  This  point  will 
be  afterwards  difcufied  more  particularly  ; 
but  I  would  obferve  here,  that  the  author 
who  has  the  moft  admirers  and  imitators 
in  this  country,  has  been  cenfured  in  Lon 
don,  where  his  character  is  highly  efteem- 
ed,  and  that  too  by  men  who  are  confefT- 
edly  partial  to  his  general  plan.  In  the 
critical  review  of  Sheridan's  Diftionaryj 

1781, 

words,  fuch  as  forchin,  nackur,  virchue  and  half  a  dozen 
others,  which  they  repeat  on  all  occafions  ;  but  being  igno 
rant  of  the  extent  of  the  practice,  they  are,  in  pronouncing 
moil  words,  as  vulgar  as  ever. 

*!T  fhould  be  remarked  that  the  late  Prefident  of  Pennfyl- 
vania,  the  Governor  of  New  Jerfey,  and  the  Prefident  of 
New  York  college,  who  are  diftinguifhed  for  erudition  an«i 
accuracy,  have  not  adopted  the  Englifh  pronunciation. 


172      DISSERTATION    III. 

1781,  there  are  the  following  exceptions  to 
his  ftandard. 

"  NEVERTHELESS  our  author  muft  not 
be  furprized  if,  in  a  matter,  in  its  nature 
fo  delicate  and  difficult,  as  that  concerning 
which  he  treats,  a  doubt  fhould  here  and 
there  arife,  in  the  minds  of  the  moft  can 
did  critics,  with  regard  to  the  propriety  of 
his  determinations.  For  inftance,  we 
would  wifh  him  to  reconfider,  whether,  in 
the  words  which  begin  withfuper,  fuch  as 
fuperftition>  fuperfede,  he  is  right  in  direct- 
ing  them  to  be  pronounced  Jkooper.  What 
ever  might  be  the  cafe  in  Queen  Ann's 
time,  it  doth  not  occur  to  us,  that  any  one 
at  prefenty  above  the  lower  ranks,  fpeaks 
thefe  words  with  the  found  of  Jh  ;  or  that 
a  good  reafon  can  be  given,  for  their  being 
thus  founded.  Nay  their  being  thus  fpo- 
ken  is  contrary  to  Mr.  Sheridan's  own  rule  -9 
for  he  fays  that  the  letter/ always  preferves 
its  own  proper  found  at  the  beginning  of 
» words." 

HERE  we  are  informed  by  this  gentle 
man's  admirers,  that,  in  fome  inftances,  he 
has  impofed  upon  the  world,  as  the  ftand 
ard  of  purity,  a  pronunciation  which  is  not 
heard,  except  among  the  lower  ranks  ofpeo* 


DISSERTATION    III.       173 

pie,  and  direftly  oppofed  to  his  own  rule. 
The  reviewers  might  have  extended  their 
remarks  to  many  other  inftances,  in  which 
he  has  deviated  from  general  practice  and 
from  every  rule  of  the  language.  Yet  at 
the  voice  of  this  gentleman,  many  of  the 
Americans  are  quitting  their  former  prac 
tice,  and  running  into  errors  with  an  ea- 
gernefs  bordering  on  infatuation. 

CUSTOMS  of  the  court  and  ftage,  it  is 
confefled,  rule  without  refiftance  in  mon 
archies*  But  what  have  we  to  do  with 
the  cuftoms  of  a  foreign  nation  ?  Detached 
as  we  are  from  all  the  world,  is  it  not  pof- 
fible  to  circumfcribe  the  power  of  cuftom, 
and  lay  it,  in  fome  degree,  under  the  influ 
ence  of  propriety^?  We  are  fenfible  that  in 
foreign  courts,  a  man's  reputation  may  de 
pend  on  a  genteel  bow,  and  his  fortune 
may  be  loft  by  wearing  an  unfalhionable 
coat.  But  have  we  advanced  to  that  ftage 
of  corruption,  that  our  higheft  ambition 
is  to  be  as  particular  in  faihions  as  other 
nations  ?  In  matters  merely  indifferent, 
like  modes  of  drefs,  fome  degree  of  con 
formity  to  local  cuftom  is  neceflary  ;*  but 

when 

*  NOT  between  different  nations,  but  in  the  fame  nation* 
The  manners  and  fafnions  of  each  nation  (hould  arife  out 
of  their  circum fiances,  their  age,  theic  improvements  in 
commerce  and  agriculture. 


X74      DISSERTATION    Iff* 

when  this  conformity  requires  a  facrificd 
of  any  principle  of  propriety  cr  moral  rec^ 
titude,  fmgularity  becomes  an  honorable 
teftimony  of  an  independent  mind.  A 
man  of  a  great  foul  would  fooner  imitate 
the  virtues  of  a  cottage,  than  the  vices  of 
a  court ;  and  would  deem  it  more  honor 
able  to  gain  one  ufeful  idea  from  the  hum 
ble,  laborer,  than  to  copy  the  vicious  pro-* 
nunciation  of  a  fplendid  court,  or  become 
an  adept  in  the  licentious  principles  of  a 
Rochefter  and  a  Littleton. 

IT  will  not  be  difputed  that  Sheridan 
and  Scott  have  very  faithfully  publifhed 
the  prefent  pronunciation  of  the  Englifh 
court  and  theater*  But  if  we  may  confult 
the  rules  of  our  language  and  confider 
them  as  of  any  authority  ;  if  we  may  rely 
on  the  opinions  of  Kenrick  and  the  re 
viewers  ;  if  we  may  credit  the  beft  inform 
ed  people  who  have  travelled  in  Great  Brit 
ain,  this  practice  is  modem  and  local,  and 
cionfidered,  by  the  judicious  and  impartial, 
even  of  the  Englifh  nation,  as  a  grofs  cor-* 
ruption  of  the  pure  pronunciation. 

SUCH  errors  and  innovations  fhould  nof 
be  imitated,  becaufe  they  are  found  in  au 
thors  of  reputation,-  The  works  of  fuch 

authors 


DISSERTATION    III.       17- 

authors  fnould  rather  be  confidered  as 
lights  to  prevent  our  falling  upon  the 
rocks  of  error.  There  is  no  more  propri 
ety  in  our  imitating  the  praftice  of  the 
Englifh  theater,  becaufe  it  is  defcribed  by 
the  celebrated  Sheridan,  than  there  is  in 
introducing  the  manners  of  Rochefter  or 
the  principles  of  Bolingbroke,  becaufe  thefe 
were  eminent  characters  ;  or  than  there  is 
in  copying  the  vices  of  a  Shylock,  a  Love 
lace,  or  a  Richard  III.  becaufe  they  are  well 
defcribed  by  the  maflerly  pens  of  Shake- 
fpear  and  Richardfon.  So  far  as  the  cor- 
reftnefs  and  propriety  of  fpeech  are  con- 
lidered  as  important,  it  is  of  as  much  con- 
fequence  to  oppofe  the  introduction  of  that 
pra6lice  in  this  country,  as  it  is  to  refill  the 
corruption  of  morals,  which  ever  attends 
the  wealthy  and  luxurious  ftage  of  nation 
al  refinements. 

HAD  Sheridan  adhered  to  his  own  rules 
and  to  the  principle  of  analogy  ;  had  he 
given  the  world  a  confiftent  fcheme  of  pro 
nunciation,  which  would  not  have  had, 
for  its  uriftable  bafis,  the  fickle  praftice  of 
a  changeable  court,  he  would  have  done 
infinite  fervice  to  the  language  :  Men  of 
fcience,  who  wifh  to  preferve  the  regular 
eonftrucUon  of  tfre  language,  would  have 

rejoiced 


176      DISSERTATION    IIL 

rejoiced  to  find  fuch  a  refpeclable  authori 
ty  on  the  fide  of  propriety  ;  and  the  illit-* 
erate  copiers  of  fafhion  muft  have  rejefted 
faults  in  fpeaking,  which  they  could  not 
defend,* 

THE  corruption  however  has  taken  fuch 
deep  root  in  England,  that  there  is  little 
probability  it  will  ever  be  eradicated.  The 
practice  muft  there  prevail,  and  gradually 
change  the  whole  ftru£lure  of  the  Latin 
derivatives.  Such  is  the  force  of  cuftom, 
in  a  nation  where  all  falhionable  people 
are  drawn  to  a  point,  that  the  current  of 
opinion  is  irrefiftible  ;  individuals  muft 
fall  into  the  ftream  and  be  borne  away  by 
its  violence  ;  except  perhaps  a  few  philof- 
ophers,  whofe  fortitude  may  enable  them  to 
hold  their  ftation,  and  whofe  fenfe  of  pro 
priety  may  remain,  when  their  power  of 
oppolition  has  ceafed. 

Bur 

*  SHERIDAN,  as  an  improver  of  the  language,  ftands  a* 
flnong  the  firft  writers  of  the  Britifh  nation,  and  deferved- 
Jy.  His  Leftures  on  Elocution  and  on  Reading,  his  Trea- 
tifes  on  Education,  and  for  the  moft  part  his  Rhetorical 
Grammar,  are  excellent  and  almoft  unexceptionable  per 
formances.  In  thefe,  he  encountered  practice  and  preju 
dices,  when  they  were  found  repugnant  to  obvious  rules  of 
propriety.  But  in  his  Dictionary  he  feems  to  have  left 
his  only  defenfible  ground,  propriety,  in  purfuit  of  that 
phantom,  fafliion.  He  deferted  his  own  principles,  as  the 
Reviewers  obferve  ;  and  where  he  has  done  this,  every 
rational  man  Ihould  defert  hisftandard* 


'DISSERTATION    III.       177 


our  detached  fituatiori,  local  and 
political,  gives  us  the  power,,  while  pride, 
policy,  and  a  regard  for  propriety  and  uni 
formity  among  ourfelves,  Ihould  infpire  us 
with  a  difpofition,  to  oppofe  innovations, 
which  have  not  utility  for  their  objeft. 

WE  fhal.1  find  it  difficult  to  convince 
Englishmen  that  a,  corrupt  tafte  prevails 
in  the  Britifli  nation*  Foreigners  view  the 
Americans  with  a  degree  of  contempt  5 
they  laugh  at  our  manners,  pity  our  igno 
rance,  and  as  far  as  example  and  derifion 
can  go,  obtrude  upon  us  the  cuftoms  of 
their  native  countries.  But  in  borrowing 
from  other  nations,  we  fliould  be  exceed* 
ingly  cautious  to  feparate  their  virtues 
ftxprn  their  vices  3  their  ufeful  improve 
ments  from  their  falfe  refinements.  Stile 
and  tafte,  in  all  nations,  undergo  the  fame 
revolutions,  the  fame  progrefs  from  purity 
to  corruption,  as  "manners  and  govern 
ment  •  and  in  England  the  pronunciation. 
of  the  language  has  fhared  the  fame  fate. 
The  Auguftan  era  is  paft,  and  whether 
the  nation  perceive  and  acknowlege  the 
truth  or  not,  the  world,  as  impartial  fpec- 
tators,  obferve  and  lament  ;the  declenfion 
of  tafte  and  fcience. 

M  THE 


j;8      DISSERTATION    III- 

THE  nation  can  do  little  more  than  read 
the  works  and  admire  the  beauties  of  the 
original  author  who  have  adorned  the 
preceding  ages.  A  few,  ambitious  of  fame, 
or  driven  by  neceffity,  croud  their  names 
into  the  catalogue  of  writers,  by  imitating 
fome  celebrated  model,  or  by  compiling 
from  the  produflions  of  genius.  Nothing 
marks  more  ftrongly  the  declenfion  of  ge 
nius  in  England,  than  the  multitude  of 
plays,  farces,  novels  and  other  catchpenny 
pieces,  which  fwell  the  lift  of  modern  pub 
lications  •>  and  that  hoft  of  compilers,  who, 
in  the  rage  for  felefting  beauties  and  a- 
bridging  the  labor  of  reading,  disfigure 
the  works  of  the  pureft  writers  in  the  na 
tion.  .  Cicero  did  not  wafte  his  talents  in 
barely  reading  and  felefting  the  beauties  of 
Demofthenes  ;  and  in  the  days  of  Addiibn, 
the  beauties  of  Milton,  Locke  and  Shake- 
fpear  were  to  be  found  only  in  their  'works. 
But  tafte  is  corrupted  by  luxury  ;  utility 
is  forgotten  in  pleafure  ;  genius  is  buried 
in  diffipation,  or  proftituted  to  exalt  and 
to  damn  contending  fa£tions,  and  to  a- 
mufe  the  idle  debauchees  that  furround  a 
licentious  ftage.* 

THESE 

*  FROM  tliis  dcfcription  muft  be  cxceptcd  fome  arts 
\vhichhavc  for  their  object,  the  ple.afures  of  icnfc  and  im 
agination  3 


DISSERTATION    III.       179 

THESE  are  the  reafons  why  we  fhould 
not  adopt  promifcuoufly  their  tafte,  their 
opinions,  their  manners*  Cuftoms,  habitSj 
and  language^  as  well  as  government  ihould 
be  national.  America  fliould  have  her 
own  diftinft  from  all  the  world.  Such  is 
the  policy  of  other  nations,  and  fuch  muft 
be  our  policy,  before  the  ftates  can  be  ei-> 
ther  independent  or  refpeftable.  To  copy- 
foreign  manners  implicitly,  is  to  reverie 
the  order  of  things,  and  begin  our  politi-* 
cal  exiftence  with  the  corruptions  and  vices 
which  have  marked  the  declining  glories 
of  other  republics. 

agination  ;  asmufic  and  painting  land  fcicnccs  which  depend 
on  fixed  principles,  and  not  on  opinion,  as  mathematics 
and  philofophy.  The  former  flourish  in  the  lait  ftages  of 
national  refinement,  and  the  latter  arc  always  proceeding 
towards perfection,  by  difcoverics  and  experiment.  Criti- 
ciirn  allb  flourifhes  in  Great  Britain  :  Men  read  and  judge 
accurately,  when  original  writers  ceafe  to  adorn  the  ici- 
Correct  writers  precede  juft  criticifm* 


DISSERTATION 

M  2 


DISSERTATION    IV. 


Of  the  Formation  of  Language.  Home 
'Tookes  theory  of  the  Particles,  Examin** 
dtion  of  particular  Pbrafes. 


FORMATION  of  LANGUAGE. 


fentences* 


AVING  difcufled  the  fub- 
je6l  of  pronunciation  very 
largely  in  the  two  preced 
ing  Diflertations,  I  fhall 
now  examin  the  ufe  of 
•words  in  the  conjlruffion  of 


SEVERAL  writers  of  eminence  have  at 
tempted  to  explain  the  origin,  pr9grefs 
and  ftrufture  of  languages,  and  have  han 
dled  the  fubjeft  with  great  ingenuity  and 
profound  learning  ;  as  Harris,  Smith,  Bea- 
tie,  Blair,  Condillac,  and  others.  But  the 
M  3  difcovery 


DISSERTATION    IV, 


difcovery  of  the  true  theory  of  the  con-' 
ftruftion  of  language,  feems  to  have  been 
refervcd  for  Mr.  Home  Tooke,  author  of 
the  <c  Diverfions  of  Parley."  In  this  trea- 
tife,  however  exceptionable  may  be  par 
ticular  inftances  of  the  writer's  fpirit  and 
manner,  the  principles  on  which  the  form 
ation  of  languages  depends,  are  unfolded 
and  demonftrated  by  an  etymological  an- 
alyfis  of  the  Saxon  or  Gothic  origin  of 
the  Englifh  particles.  From  the  proofs 
which  this  writer  produces,  and  from  va 
rious  other  circumftances,  it  appears  prob 
able,  that  the  noun  or  fubftantive  is  the 
principal  part  of  fpeech,  and  from  which 
moft  words  are  originally  derived. 

THE  invention  and  progrefs  of  articulate 
founds  muft  have  been  extremely  flow. 
Rude  favages  have  originally  no  method  of 
conveying  ideas,  but  by  looks,  figns,  ^nd 
thofe  inarticulate  founds,  called  by  gram 
marians,  Interjections.  Thefe  are  proba 
bly  the  firft  beginnings  of  language.  They 
are  produced  by  the  paffions,  and  are  per 
haps  very  little  fuperior,  in  point  of  artic 
ulation  or  fignificancy,  to  tiie  founds  which 
cxprefs  the  wants  of  the  'brutes.* 

BUT 


*  IT   Is  a  difpufe  among  grammarians,  whether  llic  ir- 
tion  is  a  part  of  Ineech  ;  and  the  qiieftion.  like  m;my 

others 


DISSERTATION    IV.-     183 

BUT  the  firft  founds,  which,  by  being 
often  repeated,  would  become  articulate, 
would  be  thofe  which  favages  ufe  to  con 
vey  their  ideas  of  certain  vifible  objects, 
which  firft  employ  their  attention.  Thefe 
founds,  by  conftant  application  to  the  fame 
tilings,  would  gradually  become  the  names 
of  thofe  objefts,  and  thus  acquire  a  per 
manent  fignification.  In  this  manner, 
rivers,  mountains,  trees,  and  fuch  animals 
as  afford  food  for  favages,  would  firft  ac 
quire  names  ;  and  next  to  them,  fuch  oth 
er  objefts  as  can  be  noticed  or  perceived  by 
the  fenfes.  Thofe  names  which  are  given 
to  ideas  called  abftratf  and  complex y  or,  to 
fpeak  more  correftly,  thofe  names  which 
exprefs  a  combination  of  ideas,  are  invent 
ed  much  later  in  the  progrefs  of  language. 
Such  are  the  words,  faith,  hope,  virtue, 
genius,  &c. 

IT 


others  upon  iimilar  fubjcfts,  has  employed  more  learning 
than  common  i'enfe.  The  ample  truth  is  this  ;  the  invol 
untary  founds  produced  by  a  luddcn  pailion,  arc  the  lan 
guage  of  nature  which  is  f abject  only  to  nature's  rules. 
They  arc,  in  fome  degree,  iimilar  among  all  nations.  They 
do  not  belong  to  a  grammatical  treatife,  any  more  than  the 
loeks  of  fear,  iurprife  or  any  other  pailion.  The  words, 
ah  me!  oh  me  !  are  mere  exclamations,  asareblcG.  me!  my 
gracious  !  and  numbcrlcfs  other  founds,  which  arc  uttered 
without  any  precife  meaning,  and  are  not  reduccable  to  any 
rules,. 


184      DISSERTATION    IV. 

IT  is  unneceffary,  and  perhaps  impoffi- 
ble,  to  defcribe  the  whole  procefs  of  the 
formation  of  languages ;  but  we  may  rea» 
fon  from  the  nature  of  things  that  the  nee- 
effary  parts  of  fpeech  would  be  the  firft 
formed  ;  and  it  is  very  evident  from  ety 
mology  that  all  the  others  are  derived  from 
thefe,  either  by  abbreviation  or  combina 
tion.  The  necefiary  parts  of  fpeech  are 
the  noun  and  vert  ;  and  perhaps  we  may 
add  the  article.  Pronouns  are  not  necef- 
fary,  but  from  their  utility,  muft  be  a  very 
early  invention. 

THAT  the  noun  and  verb  are  the  only 
parts  of  fpeech,  abfolutely  necefiary  for  a 
communication  of  ideas  among  rude  na 
tions,  will  be  obvious  to  any  perfon  who 
confiders  their  manner  of  life,  and  the 
fmall  number  of  their  necefiary  ideas. 
Their  employments  are  war  and  hunting ; 
and  indeed  fome  tribes  are  fo  fitu.ated  as  to 
have  no  occupation  but  that  of  procuring 
fubfiftence.  How  few  muft  be  the  ideas 
of  a  people,  whofe  fqle  employment  is  to 
catch  fifii,  and  take  wild  beafts  for  food  ! 
Such  nations,  and  even  fome  much  far 
ther  advanced  towards  civilization,  ufe  few 
or  no  prepofitions,  adverbs  and  conjunc 
tions,  in  their  intercourfe  with  each  other, 

and 


DISSERTATION    IV.      185 

and  very  few  adje6lives.  Some  tribes  of 
favages  in  America  ufe  no  adje£lives  at  all ; 
but  exprefs '  qualities  by  a  particular  form 
of  the  verb  ;  or  rather  blend  the  affirma 
tion  and  quality  into  one  word.*  They 
have,  it  is  laid,  fome  connecting  words  in 
their  own  languages,  fome  of  which  have 
advanced  towards  copiouinefs  and  variety. 
But  when  they  attempt  to  fpeak  Englifh, 
they  ufe  nouns  and  verbs  long  before  they 
obtain  any  knowlege  of  the  particles.  They 

fpeak  in  this  manner,  go,  way fun, 

(hine tree,  fall give,  Uncas,  rum  ; 

with  great  deliberation  and  a  fliort  paufe 
between  the  words.  They  omit  the  con- 
neftives  and  the  abbreviations,  which  may 
be  called  the  "  wings  of  Mercury."  Thus 
it  is  evident,  that,  among  fuch  nations,  a 
few  nouns  and  verbs  will  anfwer  the 
pofes  of  language. 

MANY  of  this  kind  of  expreffions  re 
main  in  the  Englifh  language  to  this  day. 
Go  away  is  the  favage  phrafe  with  the  arti 
cle  a,  derived  perhaps  from  ane,  or  what  is 
more  probable,  added  merely  to  exprefs 
the  found,  made  in  the  tranlition  from  one 
word  to  the  other ;  for  if  we  attend  to  the 

manner 

*  SEE  Dr.  Edwards  on  the  Mohcgan  tongue;     New  Ha 
ven,     1788, 


i86      DISSERTATION    IV. 

manner  in  which  we  protiouncc  thefe  or 
two  fimilar  words,  we  fhall  obferve  that 
we  involuntarily  form  the  found  expreffed 
by  a  or  aw.  In  fome  fuch  manner  are 
formed  aftray,  awhile,  adown,  aground,  a- 
fiore,  above,  abaft,  among,  and  many  oth 
ers.  They  are  ufually  called  adverbs  and 
prepofitions  $  but  they  are  neither  more 
nor  lefs  than  nouns  or  verbs,  with  the  pre 
fix  # .*  That  all  the  words  called  adverbs 
and  prepofitions,  are  derived  in  like  man 
ner,  from  the  principal  parts  of  language, 
the  noun  and  verb,  is  not  demonftrable  ; 
but  that  moft  of  them  are  fo  derived,  ety 
mology  clearly  proves. 

HORNE  TQOKE's   THEORY  of  the 
PARTICLES. 

THIS  theory  derives  great  ftrength  from 
•analizing  the  words  called  conjunctions. 
It  will  perhaps  furprize  thofe  who  have  not 
attended  to  this  fubjeft,  to  hear  it  aflerted, 
that  the  little  conjunction  if,  is  a  verb  in 

the 


*  WHILE  is  an  old  Saxon  noun,  fignifying  time  ',  and  it 
is  ftill  ufcd  in  the  fame  ienic,  one  while;  all  this  while. 
Adown  is  of  uncertain  origin.  The  Saxon  aduna  cannot 
ealilybe  explained.  Above  is  from  an  old  word,  fignifying 
It  rod*  Among  is  from  the  Saxon  gemcngan  to  mix.  'ihc 
etymology  of  the  others  is  obvious. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      187 

the  Imperative  Mode.  That  this  is  the  faft 
can  no  more  be  controverted  than  any 
point  of  hiftory,  or  any  truth  that  our 
fenfes  prefent  to  the  mind.  If  is  radically 
the  fame  word  as  give  -,  it  was  in  the  Sax- 
on  Infinitive,  gif  an  y  and  in  the  Imperative, 
like  other  Saxon  verbs,  loft  the  an  5  being 
written  gif.  This  is  the  word  in  its  puri 
ty  ;  but  in  different  dialects  of  the  fame 
radical  tongue,  we  find  it  written  gife,  giff> 
g*>  yfy  yef>  anc^  yew*  Chaucer  ufed  y  in  , 
itead  of  g* 

<c  UNTO  the  devil  rough  and  blake  of  he  we 
Yevs  I  thy  body  and  my  panne  alfo." 

Freres  Talc,  7204. 

BUT  the  true  Imperative  is  gif,  as  in  the 
Sad  Shepherd.  Aft  2.  Sc.  2, 


-"  MY 


Hath  lotted  her  to  be  your  brother's  rpiftrcfs 
Gif  flie  can  be  reclaimed  ;  gif  not,  his  prey." 

THIS  is  the  origin  of  the  conjunction  if ; 
and  it  anfwers,  in  fenfe  and  derivation  to 
the  Latin^,  which  is  but  a  contraction  of 
fit.  Thus  what  we  denominate  the  Sub- 

junftive 

*  IT  has  been  .remarked  that  y  and  g  arc  gutturals  which 
bear  nearly  the  lame  affinity  to  cacii  other  as  b  and  it. 
Thus  it  happens  that,  we  find  in  old  writings  a  y  in  many 
words  where g  is  now  ufed  ;  as  ayen^  fiyenji*  for  again,  againlt, 
Thus  bayonet  is  pronounced  bagtntt, 


DISSERTATION    IV; 


junftive  mode  is  refolvable  into  the  Indic 
ative.  "  If  ye  love  me,  ye  will  keep  my 
commandments,"  is  refolvable  in  this  man 
ner  -y  "  Give,  (give  the  following  faft,  or 
fuppofe  it)  ye  love  me,  ye  will  keep  my 
commandments."  Or  thus,  "Ye  love  me, 
give  that,  ye  will  keep  my  commandments." 
But  on  this  I  fhall  be  more  particular  when 
I  come  to  fpeak  of  errors  in  the  ufe  of 
.verbs,  __ 

AN  is  ftill  vulgarly  ufed  in  the  fenfe  of 
if.  "An  pleafe  your  honor,"  is  the  ufual 
addrefs  of  fervants  to  their  matters  in  Eng 
land  -,  tho  it  is  loft  in  New  England.  But 
a  word  derived  from  the  fame  root,  is  ftill 
retained  ;  viz.  the  Saxon  anany  to  give  ; 
which  is  fometimes  pronounced  nan,  and 
fometirnes  anan,  It  is  ufed  for  what,  or 
'what  do  you  fay  $  as  when  a  perfon  fpeaks 
to  another,  the  fecond  perfon  not  hearing 
diftin&ly,  replies,  nzny  or  anan  ;  that  is, 
give  or  repeat  what  you  faid.  This  is  rid 
iculed  as  a  grofs  vulgarifm  ;  and  it  is  in 
deed  obfolete  except  among  common  peo 
ple  ;  but  is  ftriclly  corre6t,  and  if  per- 
fons  deride  the  .ufe  of  the  word,  it  proves 
at  Icaft  that  they  do  not  underftand  its 
meaning. 

UNLESS, 


DISSERTATION    IV.       189 

UNLESS,  left  and  elfey  are  all  derivatives 
of  the  old  Saxon  verb  lefan,  to  difmifs,  which 
we  preferve  in  the  word  leafe,  and  its  com 
pounds.  So  far  are  thefe  words  from  be 
ing  conjunctions,  that  they  are,  in  faft, 
verbs  in  the  Imperative  mode ;  and  this 
explanation  ferves  further  to  lay  open  the 
curious  ftrufture  of  our  language.  For 
example : 

"  UNLESS  ye  believe  ye  ftiall  not  under-' 
fland,"  may  be  thus  refolved;  <c  Ye  believe ; 
difmifs  (that  faft)  ye  fhall  not  underftand." 
Or  thus,  *35ijmfc  ye  believe,  (that  cir- 
cumftance  being  away)  ye  fhall  not  under- 
fland."  Thus  by  analizing  the  fentence 
we  find  no  Subjunftiye  mode  j  but  merely 
the  Indicative  and  Imperative. 

"  Kiss  the  Son,  left  he  be  angry,"  is 
itfolvable  in  the  fame  manner*  "  Kifs  the 
Son,  difmifs  (that)  he  will  be  angry."  Elfe 
is  ufed  nearly  in  the  fame  fenfe,  as  ia 
Chaucer,  Freres  Tale,  7240  : 

«  AXE  him  thyfelf,  if  thou  not  troweft  me, 
Or  dies  ftint  a  while  and  thou  (halt  fee.'* 

That  is,  "  If  thou  doft  not  believe  me,  a/k 
him  thyfelf,  or  difmijjing  (omitting  that) 
wait  and  thou  flialt  be  convinced. 

THOUGH. 


DISSERTATION    IV, 


,  or  tho,  commonly  called  a  con- 
junftion,  is  alfo  a  verb  in  the  Imperative 
Mode.  It  is  from  the  verb  thafian  or  tha* 
f-g<in>  which,  in  the  Saxon,  fignified  to 
grant  or  allow.  The  word  in  its  parity  is 
thaf  ox  thof-j  and  fo  it  is  pronounced  by 
many  of  the  common  people  in  -England, 
and  by  fome  in  America. 

<c  J?HO  he  flay  me,  yet  will  I'trnft  in 
him,"  may  be  thus  explained  ,  "  Allow 
(fuppofe)  he  fhould  flay  me,  yet  will  I  truft 
in  him."  That  this  is  the  true  fenfe  of  tho, 
is  evident  from  another  faft.  The  old 
writers  ufed  algife  for  although  ;  and  its 
meaning  muft  be  nearly  the  fame. 


.WHOSE  pcre  is  hard  to  find, 


"  Mgifc  England  and  France  were  thorow  fauglil.1' 

Rcl.  An.  Poet.  115. 

SINCE  is  merely  a  participle  of  the  old 
verb  feon,  to  fee.  In  ancient  authors  we 
find  it  varioufly  written  ;  as  Jifby  fithence> 
/?«,  fltberiy  &c.  and  the  common  people  in 
New  England  ftill  pronounce  it  fin,  fen 
or  fence.  Of  all  thefe,  fin  or  fen,  which 
is  fo  much  ridiculed  as  vulgar,  comes  near- 
eft  to  the  originaiy<^72.*  This  explanation 

of 

*  FOUR  hundred  years  ago,  the  purefl  author  wrote  ft/i 
Grfin  which  is  now  deemed  vulgar; 

«  Sl-N 


DISSERTATION    IV.      191 

of  face  unfolds  the  true  theory  of  lan 
guages,  and  proves  that  all  words  are  o- 
riginally  derived  from  thofe  which  are  firft 
ufed  to  exprels  ideas  of  fenfible  objects. 
Mankind,  inftead  of  that  abftraft  fenfe 
which  we  annex  tofmce?  if  we  have  any 
idea  at  all  when  wre  ufe  it,  originally  faid, 
feen  the  fan  rofe,  it  has  become  warm  ;  that 
is,  after  the  fun  rofe,  or  that  circumftance 
beingy^;/  or  paft.  We  ufe  the  fame  word 
now,  with  a  little  variation  ;  but  the  ety 
mology  is  loft  to  moft  people,  who  {till  em 
ploy  the  word  for  a  precife  purpofe,  intel 
ligible  to  their  hearers. 

BUT  has  two  diftinQ:  meanings,  and  two 
different  roots.  This  is  evident  to  any  per- 
fon  who  attends  to  the  manner  of  ufmg 
the  word.  We  fay,  "But  to. proceed  3"  that 
is,  ihore  or  further.  We  fay  alfo,  ec  All 
left  the  room,  but  one ;"  that  is,  except 
one.  Thefe  two  fignifications,  which  are 
eonftantly  and  infenfibly  annexed  to  the 
word,  will  perhaps  explain  all  its  ufes  ;  but 
cannot  be  well  accounted  for,  without  lap- 
pofing  it  to  have  two  etymologies.  Hap 
pily  the  early  writers  furnilh  us  with  the 

means 


"  SIN  thou  art  right  Arijuge,  how  may  it  b?, 
That  chou  wolt  foiTren  hmocc-ruc  'o  JpIU, 
Ana  wicked  folk  to  rcgn;  in  pr< 

1    •'  '   ^  j. '  "••   - 


192     DISSERTATION    IV. 

means  of  folving  the  difficulty.  Gawen 
Douglafs  the  poet,  was  cotemporary  with 
Chaucer,  or  lived  near  his  time,  was  Biihop 
of  Dunkeld  in  Scotland,  and  probably 
wrote  the  language  in  the  purity  of  his 
age  and  country.  As  the  Scots  in  the 
Low  Lands,  are  defendants  of  the  Saxons, 
in  common  with  the  Englifli,  and  from 
their  local  fituation,  have  been  lefs  expofed 
to  revolutions,  they  have  preferved  more  of 
the  Saxon  idiom  and  orthography  than 
their  fouthcrn  brethren.  In  Douglafs  we 
find  two  different  words  to  exprefs  the  two 
different  meanings, .  which  we  now  annex: 
to  one  5  viz.  hot  and  but.  The  firft  is  ufed 
in  the  fenfe  of  more*  further  or  addition ; 
and  the  laft  in  the  fenfe  of  except  or  take 
away. 

"  EOT  thy  work  fhall  endure  in  laude  and  glorie, 
But  fpot  or  fait  condigne  eterne  memorie." 

The  firft  Mr.  Home  derives  from  botan,  to 
boot)  to  give  more  ;  from  which  our  Eng- 
lifh  word  boot,  which  is  now  for  the  molt 
part  confined  to  jockies,  is  alfo  derived  ; 
and  the  other  from  be  utan*  to  be  out 
or  away.  That  thefe  etymologies  are  juft 

is 

*  OUT  was  originally  a  verb.     So  in  the  firft  line  of  the 
celebrated  Chevy  Chace. 


DISSERTATION    IV.       193 

Is  probable,  both  from  old  writings  and 
from  the  prefent  diftinft  ufes  of  the  word 
but.  This  word  therefore  is  the  blending 
or  corruption  of  hot  and  beut,  the  Impera 
tives  of  two  Saxon  verbs,  botan  and  be 


AND 


"  The  Perfe  oiot  of  Northombarlande, 
And  a  vow  to  God  naade  he,"  &c. 


I  HAVE,  in  one  or  two  inflances,  obferved  the  ufe  of  it 
ftill  among  the  lower  clafles  of  people,  in  this  country  ;  and 
I  find  outed  in  Tome  good  writers,  as  late  as  Charles  I. 

*  MR.  Home  remarks  that  the  French  word  mats  was 
formerly  ufed  in  the  fenfe  of  more,  or  bot.  The  Englifh 
\vord  more  was  formerly  often  fpelt  mo» 

"  TELLE  me  anon  withouten  wordes  wo.'* 

Chaucer,  Prol.  to  Cant.  Tales,  Sio. 

Is  it  not  poflible  that  TWO  or  wore  and  the  French  mais  may 
be  radically  the  fame  word  ? 

THE  following  pafiagc  will  confirm  the  foregoing  ex 
planation  of  beutan.  It  is  taken  from  the  Saxon  verfion  of 
r.he  Goipels.  -  Luke,  .chap.  i.  v.  74.  of  the  original. 


we  butdn  ege  of  ure  feonda  handa  alyfede,  hira 
"heowrian." 

THIS  verfion  of  the  Gofpelsxvas  doubtlefs  as  early  as  the 
tenth  or  eleventh  century.  In  Wickliffs  verfion,  made 
about  three  centuries  later,  the  paflage  ftaiids  thus  t  "  That 
we  without  drede,  dclyvewd  fro  the  hand  of  ourc  encmyes, 
ferve  to  him.*'  Where  we  find  butan  and  without  are  fy- 
nonimous. 

THE  wor;l  hot  or  bate  is  ftill  retained  in  the  law  language, 
fire-bet^  houjk-bote  ;  wficre  it  is  equivalent  to  enough  or 

N 


i94      DISSERTATION    IV. 

AND  is  probably  a  contraftion  of  anan, 
to  give,  the  verb  before  mentioned ;  and 
ad,  the  root  of  the  verb  add,  and  fignifying 
feries  or  remainder.    An  ad,  give  the  remain 
der. 

THE  word  with,  commonly  called  a 
prepofition,  is  likewife  a  verb.  It  is  from' 
the  Saxon  withan,  to  join  ;  or  more  prob 
ably  from  wyrth,  to  be,  or  the  German 
werden,  devenir,  to  be.  The  reafon  for 
this  latter  conjefture,  is  that  we  have  pre- 
ferved  the  Imperative  of  wyrth  or  werden, 
in  this  ancient  phrafe,  "  woe  worth  the 
day ;"  that  is,  woe  be  to  the  day.  The 
German  verb,  in  its  inflexions,  makes 
ivirft  and  wurde  -,  and  is  undoubtedly  from 
the  fame  root  as  the  Danifh  varer,  to  be. 
But  whether  with  has  its  origin  in  withan, 
to  join,  or  in  werden,  to  be,  its  fenfe  will 
be  nearly  the  fame  ;  it  will  ftill  convey  the 
idea  of  connexion.  This  will  plainly  ap 
pear  to  any  perfon  who  confiders,  that  by 
is  merely  a  corruption  of  be,  from  the  old 
verb  beon  -,  and  that  this  word  is  ftill  ufed  to 
exprefs  connexion  or  nearnefs  ;  "  He  lives 
by  me  ;"  "  He  went  by  me  ;"  that  is,  he 
lives  be  me. 

THIS  verb  be  was  formerly  ufed  in  this 
phrafe  ;  be  my  faith,  be  my  troth  j  that  is, 

by 


DISSERTATION     IV.       195 


y  as  in  Ch^vy  Chace.*  We  ftill 
find  the  fame  verb  in  a  multitude  of  com*- 
pounds,  be-come,  be-yond,  be-tween,  be-fide, 
be-fore.  Thus  we  fee  what  are  called  prep- 
ofitions,  are  mere  combinations  or  corrup 
tions  of  verbs  \  they  are  not  a  primitive 
part  of  language,  and  if  we  refolve  this 
phrafe,  be  'went  beyond  me,  we  fhall  find  it 
compofed  of  thefe  wrords,  be.  'went,  be,  gone, 
me  ;  yond  being  nothing  but  the  participle 
of  go. 

WILL  my  grammatical  readers  believe 
me,  when  I  allert  that  the  affirmation  ^#, 
or  yes,  is  a  verb  P  That  it  is  fo,  is  undenia 
ble.  The  Englifh  yea,  yes,  and  the  Ger 
many^,  pronounced  yaw,  are  derived  from 
a  verb  in  the  Imperative  Mode  ;  or  rather, 
they  are  but  corruptions  of  aye,  the  Im 
perative  of  the  French  avoir,  to  have.  The 
pure  word  aye,  is  ftill  ufed  in  Englilh. 
The  affirmation  yea  or  yes,  is  have,  an  ex- 
preffion  of  afTsnt,  have  what  you  fay.  ^ 

THAT 

*  So  in  Mandeville's  works.  "  And  fight  as  the  fchip 
men  taken  here  avys  here,  and  govern  herri  be,  the  lode 
iterre,  right  To  don  fchip  men  bezonde  the  parlies*  be  the 
iterre  of  the  Southe,  the  which  apperethe  not  to  us/3 

f  The  French  oiti  is  faid  to  be  a  derivative  or  participle  of 
the  verb  ouir  to  hear.  The  mode  of  altent  therefore  is  by 

-'orJ  htard  ;  as  what  you  fay  is  heard  ',  a  mode  equally 
wii,l\  the  Englilh. 

N  2 


196      DISSERTATION    IV. 

THAT  all  the  words,  called  adverbs,  are 
abbreviations  or  combinations  of  nouns, 
verbs  and  adjeftives,  cannot  perhaps  be 
proved  ;  for  it  is  extremely  difficult  to 
trace  the  little  words,  when,  then,  there, 
here,  &c.  to  their  true  origin.*  But  ex 
cepting  a  few,  the  whole  clafs  of  words, 
denominated  adverbs,  can  be  refolved  into 
other  parts  of  fpeech.  The  termination 
ly,  which  forms  a  large  proportion  of  thefe 
words,  is  derived  from  the  Saxon  liche, 
like. 

"  AND  as  an  angel  heavcn/fc^  ftie  fung/' 

Chaucer,  Cant.  Tales,  1057. 

WE  have  in  a  few  words  retained  the  o- 
riginal  pronunciation,  as  Godlike  -,  but  in 
ftri6tnefs  of  fpeech,  there  is  no  difference 
between  Godlike  and  Godly. -^ 

NOTWITHSTANDING 

*  IT  is  moft  probable  that  many  of  the  Englifh  words 
beginning  with  zvh  are  from  the  lame  original  as  the  Latin 
qui,  quae,  quod  ;  and  both  coeval  with  the  Greek.  Qui  and 
who  ;  quod  and  what  ;  are  from  the  fame  root,  and  a 
blending  of  the  Greek  xxi  o  and  x&t  on.  This  fuppofition 
is  ftrongly  fupported  by  the  ancient  Scotch  orthography  of 
what,  where,  &c.  which  was  quhat,  quhar. 

•f  TttE  termination  fy,  from  lie  he,  added  to  ad.jccT.ives, 
forms  the  part  of  fpeech  called  adverbs  ;  as  graft,  greatly  ; 
gracious^  gracioujly.  But  when  this  termination  is  added  to 
a  noun,  it  forms  an  adjective,  as  God,  Godly  ;  heaven,/ 
heavenly  ;  and  thefe  words  are  alfo  ufed  adverbially  ;  for 
they  will  not  admit  the  addition  of  another  ly.  Godlify, 

which 


I 

DISSERTATION    IV. 

NOTWITHSTANDING  it  is  evident  that 
conjunctions,  prepofitions,  and  adverbs  are 
not  original  and  necefiary  parts  of  fpeech, 
yet  as  fpecies  of  abbreviations,  or  com 
pound  terms  to  exprefs  affemblages  of  i- 
deas,  they  may  be  confidered  as  very  ufe- 
ful,  and  as  great  improvements   in  lan 
guage.     Every  perfon,  even  without  the 
leaft  knowlege  of  etymology,  acquires  a 
habit  of  annexing  a  certain  idea,  or  cer 
tain  number  of  ideas  to  unlefs,  left,  yes,  be 
tween,  and  the  other  particles  ;    he  ufes 
them  with  precifion,  and  makes  himfelf 
underftood  by  his  hearers  or  readers .  Thefe 
words  enable  him  to  communicate  his  i- 
deas  with  greater  facility  and  expedition, 
than  he  could  by  mere  names  and  affirma 
tions.     They  have  loft  the  diflinguifhing 
charafteriftics  of  verbs,  perfon,  time,  and 
inflexion.     It  is  therefore  convenient  for 
grammatical  purpofe*s,  to  afiign  them  dif- 
tinft  places  and  give  them  names,  accord 
ing  to  their  particular  ufes.     Such  of  thefe 
old  verbs  as  exhibit  fome  connexion  be 
tween  the  members  of  a  difcourfe,  may 
be  properly  denominated  conjqn&ions.  Oth 
ers,  that  are  uied  to  (how  certain  relations 

between 

which  has  been  fometimes  uied,  that  is,  Gcdttkclih,  and 
other  fimilar  words,  are  not  admiiiible,  on  any  principle! 

whatever. 

N3 


198       DISSERTATION    IV. 

between  words  and  are  generally  prefixed 
to  them,  may  be  well  called  prepofitions.-  A 
third  fpecies,  which  are  employed  to  qual 
ify  the  fenfe  of  other  words,  may,  from 
their  pofition  and  ufes  in  a  difcourfe,  be 
denominated  adverbs.  But  the  foregoing 
inveftigation  is  necefTary  to  unfold  the 
true  principles  on  which  language  is  con- 
ftru&ed,  and  the  philofophical  enquirer  is 
referred  for  a  more  general  view  of  the 
iubje£l,  to  Mr.  Home  Tooke's  Di<verfions 
of  Purley. 

THE  <cerh  or  word  is  fo  called  by  way  of 
eminence  ;  the  ancient  grammarians  hav 
ing  confidered  it  as  the  principal  part  of 
ipeech.  The  noun  is  however  entitled  to 
the  precedence  ;  it  is  of  equal  importance 
in  language,  and  undoubtedly  claims  pri 
ority  of  origin.  Philofophy  might  teach 
us  that  the  names  of  a  few  vifible  objects 
would  be  firfl  formed  by  barbarous  men, 
and  afterwards  the  words  which  exprefs 
the  moft  common  a£lions.  But  with  re- 
fpecl  to  names  of  abftract  ideas,  as  they  are 
ufually  called,  they  not  only  precede  the 
formation  of  the  verbs  which  reprefent  the 
aftion,  but  it  often  happens  that  the  fame 
word  is  ufed,  with  a  prefix  to  denote  the 
aftion  of  the  objeft  to  which  the  name  is 

given. 


DISSERTATION    IV.       199 

given.  For  example,  love  and  fear  are  the 
names  of  certain  paffions  or  afteflions  of 
the  mind.  To  exprefs  the  a£lion  or  exer 
tion  of  thefe  affeftions,  we  have  not  in 
vented  diftincl  terms  >  but  cuftom  has  for 
this  purpofe  prefixed  the  word  do  or  toy 
which,  in  its  primitive  fenfe,  is  to  a£ly  move* 
or  make.*  Thus  I  do  love,  or  do  fear,  are 
merely,  I  affy  love,  or  aft  if  ear  \  and  to  love 
and  to  fear  in  the  Infinitive,  are  aft^  love,, 
and  a£t,  fear. 

To  confirm  thefe  remarks,  let  it  be  con- 
fidered  that  formerly  do  and  did  were  al- 
moft  invariably  ufed  with  the  verb  j  as  J 
dofear^  he  did  love  \  and  the  omiffion  of 
thefe  words  in  affirmative  declarations  is 
of  a  modern  date.  They  are  ftill  prefer v- 
ed  in  particular  modes  of  exprelfion  $  as 
in  the  negative  and  interrogative  forms, 
and  in  emphatical  affertions. 

THE  prefent  hypothefis  will  derive  ad 
ditional  ftrength  from  another  circum- 
ftance.  Grammarians  allege  that  the  ter 
mination  of  the  regular  preterit  tenfe,  edy 
is  a  corruption  of  did.  If  io,  it  feems  to 
have  been  originally  optional,  either  to 

place 

'  *  DO  and  to  are  undoubtedly  from  the  fame  root ;  d  and 
i  being  convertible  letters. 


200      DISSERTATION    IV. 

place  the  word  did,  which  exprefled  the  ac+ 
tion  of  the  objeft,  before  or  after  the  name. 
Thus,  he  feared,  is  refolvable  into  he  fear 
did,  and  mufl  be  a  blending  of  the  words 
in  a  hafty  pronunciation.     But  it  was  air 
fo  a  practice  to  fay  he  did  fear,  which  ar 
rangement  is  not  yet  loft  nor  obfcured ;  but 
in  no  cafe  are  both  thefe  forms  ufed,  he  did 
feared*,  a  prefumptive  evidence  of  the  truth 
of  the  opinion,  that  id  is  a  contraction  of 
did.  Indeed  I  fee  no  objection  to  the  opinion 
but  this,  that  it  is  not  eafy  on  this  fuppofi- 
tion,  to  account  for  the  formation  of  did 
from  do.     Jf  did  is  itfelf  a  contraftion  of 
doed,  the  regular  preterit,  which  is  probable, 
whence  comes  ed  in  this  word  ?  To  derive 
ed  in  other  words  from  did  is  eafy  and  nat 
ural  ;  but  this  leaves  us  fhort  of  the  pri 
mary  caufe  or  principle,  a$d  confequently 
in  fufpenfe,  as  to  the  truth  of  the  opinion. 
Yet  whatever  may  be  the  true  derivation 
of  the  regular  ending  of  the  paft  time  an4 
perfeft  participle  of  Englifh  verbs,  the  ufe 
pf  do,  did  and  to  before  the  verb,  is  a  ftrong 
evidence,  that  at  leaft  one  clafs  of  affirma 
tions  are  formed  by  the  help  of  names,  with 
£  prefix  to  denote  the  aftion  of  the  objedts 
exprefled  by  the  names.     I  fear,  therefore, 
is  a  phrafe,  compofed  of  the  pronoun  /, 
and  the  noun  fear  $  and  the  affirmation^ 

cpntaiue4 


DISSERTATION    IV.      20* 

contained  in  the  phrafe,  is  derived  ^  from 
the  fmgle  circumftance  of  the  pofition  of 
the  name  after  /.  I  fear  is^a  modern  fub- 
ftitute  for  /  do  fear  ;  that  is,  /  acl.fear  $ 
all  originally  and  ftriftly  nouns.  But  by  a 
habit  of  uniting  the  perfonal  name  I  with 
the  name  of  the  paffion  jfezr,  we  inftantly 
recognize  an  affirmation  that  the  paffion  is 
exerted ;  and  doy  the  primitive  name 
has  become  fuperfluovis, 


EXAMINATION  of  PARTICULAR 
PHRASES. 

HAVING  made  thefe  few  remarks  on 
the  formation  of  our  language,  I  ihall 
proceed  to  examin  the  criticifms  of  gram 
marians  on  certain  phrafes,  and  endeavor 
to  fettle  fome  points  of  controverfy  with 
refpeft  to  the  ufe  of  words  ;  and  alfo  to 
detefl  .fome  inaccuracies  which  prevail  in 


NOUNS. 

WRITERS  upon  the  fubjeft  of  propri 
ety  in  our  language,  have  objected  to  the 
Vie  of  means,  with  the  article  a  and  the  de 
finitive  pronouns  fingular,  this  and  that. 

The 


202      DISSERTATION    IV. 

The  obje&ion  made  is,  that  as  this  word 
ends  in  sy  it  muft  be  plural,  and  cannot  be 
joined  in  conftru6lion  with  words  in  the 
fmgular.  This  objection  fuppofes  that  all 
nouns  ending  with  s  are  plural  5  but  this 
would  perhaps  prove  too  much,  and  make 
it  neceffary  to  confider  all  nouns,  not  end 
ing  in  sy  as  fmgular,  which  cannot  be  true, 
even  on  the  principles  of  thofe  who  bring 
the  objeftion.  The  fuppofition  in  both 
cafes  would  be  equally  well  founded. 

IT  appears  to  me  however,  that  the  fenfc 
of  the  word,  and  particularly  the  univerfal 
pra6lice  of  the  Englifh  nation,  ought  to 
have  induced  the  critical  grammarian,  who 
wifhed  to  reduce  the  language  to  fome  cer 
tainty,  to  fupprefs  the  objeftion.  The 
word  means,  applied  to  a  fmgle  inftrument 
of  aftion,  or  caufe,  conveys  &fingle  idea  -, 
and  I  prefume,  was  generally  ufed  for  this 
purpofe,  till  Bifhop  Lowth  queftioned  the 
propriety  of  the  practice  ;  at  leaft  mean  is 
icarcely  ufed  as  a  noun,»  in  any  author 
from  Chaucer  to  Lowth.  On  the  contra 
ry,  the  beft  writers  have  ufed  means  either 
in  the  fmgular  or  plural  number,  accord 
ing  as  they  had  occafion  to  exprefs  by  it 
an  idea  of  one  caufe  or  more. 


DISSERTATION    IV.       203 

"  BY  this  means,  it  became  every  man's 
intereft,  as  well  as  his  duty  to  prevent  all 
crimes ." Temple,  Works,  vol.  3 .  p.  1 3  3 . 

"  AND  by  this  means  I  fhould  not  doubt," 
&c. Wilkins  Real  Charader,  book  i. 

"AND  finding  themfelves  by  this  means. 

to  be  fafe." Sidney  on  Gov.  chap.   3. 

feft.  36. 

"  Fon  he  hopeth  by  this  means  to  acquit 
himfelf." Rawley's  Sylva  Sylvarum. 

"  AND  by  that  means  they  loft  their  bar 
rier." Moyle  on  the  Lacedem.  Gov. 

"  CLOD  i  us  was  now  quaeftor  and  by  that 

means  a  fenator." Middleton  L.  of  Cic. 

vol.  i.  p.  261. 

<c  BY  this  means  however,  there  was  noth 
ing  left  to  the  Parliament  of  Ireland." 

Blackftone's  Com.  vol.  i.  p.  102. 

IN  this  manner  was  the  word  ufcd  by 
the  elegant  writers  in  Queen  Anne's  reign. 

BUT  we  have  not  only  the  authority  of 
almoft  every  good  writer  in  the  language, 
for  this  ufe  of  Cleans  in  the  fingular  as 
well  as  plural  number,  but  we  have  the 

authority 


DISSERTATION    IV. 


authority  of  almoft  unanimous  national 
praftice  in  fpeaking.  It  is  rare  to  hear 
mean  ufed  as  a  noun,  and  by  thofe  only 
who  are  fettered  by  the  arbitrary  rules  of 
grammarians.  I  queftion  whether  the 
word,  in  the  fingular  form,  has  obtained 
fuch  an  eftablifhment,  as  to  be  entitled  to 
a  place  among  the  Englifh  nouns.  The 
ufe  of  it  appears  like  pedantry.  No  man, 
whatever  may  be  his  rank  and  abilities,  has 
a  right  to  reje6l  a  mode  of  fpeech,  eftab- 
lifhed  by  immemorial  ufage  and  univerfal 
confent.  Grammars  fhould  be  formed  on 
fraftict  ;  for  practice  determines  what  a 
language  is.  I  do  not  mean  a  local  practice, 
for  this  would  fubjeft  us  to  perpetual  vari 
ety  and  inftability  ;  but  national  or  general 
practice.  The  latter,  it  has  been  remark 
ed,  is  the'ftandard  of  propriety,  to  which 
all  local  idioms  and  private  opinions  fhould 
be  facrificed.  The  bufmefs  of  a  gramma 
rian  is  not  to  examin  whether  or  not  na 
tional  pra&ice  is  founded  on  philofophical 
principles  j  but  to  af  certain  the  nation 
al  practice,  that  the  learner  may  be  able 
to  weed  from  his  own,  any  local  peculiar 
ities  or  falfe  idioms. 

IF  this  means  and  a  means  are  now,   and 
have  immemorially  been,  ufed  by  good  au 

thors 


DISSERTATION    IV.      205 

thors  and  the  nation  in  general,  neither 
Johnfon,  Lowth,  nor  any  other  perfon, 
however  learned,  has  a  right  to  fay  that 
the  phrafes  are  not  good  Englifo.  That 
this  is  the  fa6l,  every  perfon  may  fatisfy 
himfelf,  by  confulting  the  good  authors 
and  observing  the  univerfal  pra<5Hce  in  dif- 
courfe. 

BESIDES,  the  general  practice  of  a  na 
tion  is  not  eafily  changed,  and  the  only  ef- 
feft  that  an  attempt  to  reform  it  can  pro 
duce,  is,  to  make  many  people  doubtful, 
cautious,  and  confequently  uneafy  ;  to 
render  a  few  ridiculous  and  pedantic  by 
following  nice  criticifms  in  the  face  of  cuf- 
tomary  propriety  ;  and  to  introduce  a  dif- 
tinftion  between  the  learned  and  unlearn 
ed,  which  ferves  only  to  create  difficulties 
for  both. 

DR.  Prieftley  is  the  only  writer  upon 
this  fubje£t  who  feems  to  have  been  guided 
by  juft  principles.  He  obferves,  with  great 
propriety x  that  <c  Grammarians  have  lean 
ed  too  much  to  the  analogies  of  the  Latin 
language,  contrary  to  our  mode  of  fpeak*- 
ing  and  to  the  analogies  of  other  languages, 
more  like  our  own.  It  muft  be  allowed, 

that  the  cuftom  of  Ipeaking,  is  the  origin- 

o  i 


ao6      DISSERTATION    IV. 

al  and  only  juft  ftandard  of  any  language.'* 
Pref.  to  Gram,  page  9.  His  criticifms  are 
exceedingly  judicious,  and  are  entitled  to 
the  confideration  of  the  ftudent,  in  prefer 
ence  to  thofe  of  Lowth,  or  any  other  Eng- 
lifli  author.  He  confiders  means  as  belong 
ing  <c  to  that  clafs  of  words  which  do  not 
change  their  termination  on  account  of 
number."  It  is  ufed  in  both  numbers,  a 
means,  or  thefe  means,  with  equal  propri 
ety. 

To  the  fame  clafs  of  words  belong  pains, 
news,  and  perhaps  fome  others.  Every 
perfon  who  has  read  good  Englifh  authors, 
or  lived  where  the  language  is  fpoken  in 
purity,  muft  have  obferved  that  the  word 
fains  is  ufually  preceded  by  much,  and  fol 
lowed  by  a  verb  in  the  fingular  number  ; 
much  pains  'was  taken.  If  the  word  is  a 
plural  noun,  it  fhould  neither  be  followed 
by  a  fingular  verb,  nor  preceded  by  much  ; 
for  we  never  prefix  much  to  plurals.  The 
rnofl  untutored  ear  would  be  offended  at 
much  papers,  much  labors.  But  do  we  not 
always  fay  much  pains  ?  Do  we  ever  fay 
^2  any  pains  'were  taken  ?  I  confefs  I  never 
yet  heard  or  iaw  the  expreffion.  .  Yet 
Lowth  contends  that  pains  is  plural.  This 
criticifm  upon  the  word  is  an  authority  in 

vindication 


DISSERTATION    IV.      207 

vindication  of  an  erroneous  practice  of 
ufmg  it  with  a  plural  verb,  even  when  it 
is  preceded  by  much.  So  in  Sheridan's  Art 
of  Reading,  we  obferve  thefe  words  ;  "  If 
fo  much  pains  were  thought  neceflary  among 
them,"  &c.  Temple  indulges  the  fame 
miftake  ;  "I  know  how  much  pains  have 
been  taken  to  deduce  the  words  Baro  and 
feudum  from  the  Latin  and  Greek,  and  even 
from  the  Hebrew  and  Egyptian  tongue.'* 
Works,  vol.  3.  p.  365. 

MIGHT  not  thefe  writers  have  ufed, 
muchjheep  were  killed,  with  the  fame  pro 
priety  ?  J 

THE  fenfe  of  the  word  pains  does  not 
require  that  we  fhould  confider  it  as  a  plu 
ral  ;  for  it  fignifies  labor  or  fatigue,  in  con- 
tradiftindtion  to  thofe  uneafy  fenfations, 
each  of  which  fingly  is  called  a  pain,  and 
to  exprefs  a  number  of  which  pains  is  ufed 
as  a  plural.  On  the  other  hand  we  have 
the  authority  of  general  praftice  for  unit 
ing  with  it  much,  wrhich  can  in  no  cafe  be 
ufed  with  a  plural,  and  alfo  a  verb  in  the 
firigular  number. 

— cc  AND  taken  much  pains  fo  to  pro 
portion  the  powers  of  the  feveral  magii- 

trates." Sidney  on  Gov.  feft.  i. 

"  I  FOUND 


208      DISSERTATION    IV. 

"I  FOUND  much  art  and  pains  employ** 
ed/' — ; — Middleton. 

"  HE  will  aflemble  materials  with  much 
pains" Boiling,  on  Hift.  letter  4. 

"  As  to  our  own  language,  feveral  per-* 
fons  have  taken  much  pains  about  the  or 
thography  of  it." Wilkins  Real  Char. 

book  i.  chap.  5. 

THERE  are  a  few  inftances  in  which 
good  authors  have  confidered  news  as  a 
plural ;  as 


"  FROM  all  regions  where  the  beft 
*r?made." B.  Johnfon,  Staple  of  News. 

cc  AND  feal  the  news  and  iffue  them!'  »  •  •* 
The  fame. 

BUT  can  an  Englifh  ear  relifh  this  af- 
fefted  correftnefs  ?  Hear  the  language  of 
Cowley  and  Shakefpear,  who  wrote  as  the 
nation  fpoke  : 

"  A  ct  NE  R  AL  joy  at  this  glad  newts  app6ar*d." 

Cowley's  Davideis,  book  j» 

<«  Now  by  St.  Paul  this  news  is  bad  indeed  !" 

The  fame. 

"  Nd  news  fo  bad  abroad  as  this  at  home/' 

Rich.  III.  fcene  i. 

SUCH 


DISSERTATION    IV.      209 

SUCH  is  the  language  at  this  day,  and  a 
man  would  expofe  himfelf  to  ridicule,  who 
fhould  fay,  thefe  news  are  good. 

LATE  writers  feem  to  confider  riches  as 
plural  ;  but  erroneoufly.  It  is  merely  a 
contraftion  of  richeffe^  the  French  fingu- 
lar,  which  was  probably  introduced  into 
England  under  the  Norman  kings.  Chau 
cer  ufes  richejje  as  the  fingular  : 

"  BUT  for  ye  fpeken  of  fwiche  gentillefle, 
\    As  is  defcended  out  of  old  riche/e." 

Cant.  Tales,  669  1  * 


he  that  ones  to  love  doeth  his  homage 
Full  oftentymes  dere  bought  is  the  richeffe." 

La  Belle  Dame  fans  inercy,  323. 

THE  word  ncbeffe  here  is  no  more  plu 
ral  than'gentibtffft  diftrej/e,  doubleneffe^  which 
the  author  -ufes  in  the  fame  poem  ;  and 
riches  now,   in  ftriftnefs  of  fpeech,  is  no 
more  plural  than  gentlenefs,  dijirefs^  or  any 
other  word   of    fimilar  ending.      When 
Chaucer  had  occafion  for  a  plural,  he  wrote 
the  word  richejjes  ;  as  in  the  Tale  of  Me- 
libeus  :  "  Thou  haft  dronke  fo  muche  hony 
of  fwete  temporal  richejjes  and  delices  and 
honors  of  this  world,"  &c.  ......  ••  Works,  vol. 

4.  p.  170.  Bell's  edit, 

THE 
O 


210      DISSERTATION    IV. 

THE  word  riches  therefore  is  in' the  fin- 
gular  number  and  merely  an  abbreviation 
of  richeffe  ;  as  diftrefs  is  of  diftreffe  ;  iveak~ 
nefs,  of  weaknejje,  &c.  and  the  reafon  why 
the  plural  rioheffes  has  been  neglefted,  may 
be,  that  the  idea  it  conveys  does  not  admit 
of  number  any  more  than  that  of  wealth, 
which  is  alfo  deftitute  of  a  plural  form. 

"  WAS  ever  riches  gotten  by  your  golden 

mediocrities  ?" Cowley  on  Cromwell's 

Gov. 

"  WHEN  love  has  taken  all  thou  haft  away, 
His  ftrength  by  too  much  riches  will  decay." 

Cowley. 

"  THE  envy  and  jealoufy  which  great 

riches  is  always  attended  with." Moyle's 

Eflay  on  Lacedem.  Gov.  48. 

<c  IN  one  hour  is  fo  great  riches  come  to 
nought." Bible. 

HERE  riches  is  confidered  in  its  true 
light.  Notwithftanding  this,  the  termi 
nation  of  the  word  has  led  late  writers 
into  the  opinion,  that  it  is  plural  5  fo  that 
we  generally  fee  it  followed  by  a  plural 
verb  :  Should  this  become  the  unanimous 
opinion  and  a  general  correfpondent  prac 
tice  cnfue,  riches  will  be  eftablifhed  as  a 

plural. 


DISSERTATION     IV.       2*1 

plural,  contrary  to  etymology  and  ancient 
ufage. 


is  alfo  in  the  fmgular  number ; 
being  a  contraftion  of  the  old  Norman 
French,  almefle,  the  plural  of  which  was 
almeffes.  So  in  Chaucer  : 

"  YE  knowen  wel  that  I  am  poure  and  olde, 
Kithe  (fho\r)  youralmejfe  upon  me  poure  wretche." 

FreresTale,  7190. 

"  fms  almeffe  fhouldeft  thou  do  of  thy 

propre  thinges,"  &c. Vol.  5.  p.  217. 

Bell. 

Cf  THESE  ben  generally  the  almejjes  and 
werkes  of  <:haritie  of  hem  that  have  tern- 
porel  richefTes," The  fame. 

ALMS  is  ufed  as  a  noun  fmgular  in  the 
Bible  *  "  To  aik  an  alms?'  "  He  gave 
much  alms  •"  that  is,  almejft,  or  charity. 
The  plural  of  this  word  is  not  ufed. 

LARGESS  is  a  word  of  this  clafs.  It  is 
from  the  old  French  largeffe  ;  but  the  idea 
admits  of  number,  and  accordingly  we  find 
the  plural,  largejfcs,  ftill  in  ufe. 


y  from  the  French  lacheffe,  is  ftill 
retained  in  tha  law  ftile  ;  but  cuftom  has 
O  2  abbreviated 


412      DISSERTATION    IV. 

abbreviated  the  word  into  lache,  a  fingle 
fyllable. 


may  properly  be  confidered  as 
in  the  fingular  number,  and  fo  it  is  ufed 
by  one  of  our  beft  writers.  "  They  muft 
needs  think  that  this  honor  to  him,  when 
dead,  was  but  a  necefiary  amends  for  the  inju 
ry  which  they  had  done  him;  when  living." 
-^—  Middleton's  L.  of  Cic.  vol.  3.  p.  131, 

THE  idea  here  conveyed  by  amends  is  as 
fingle  as  that  expreffed  by  compensation* 
The  word  has  no  change  of  termination, 
and  may  be  confidered  as  fingular  or  plu 
ral,  at  the  choice  of  the  writer. 

WAGES  is  a  word  of  the  fame  kind, 

VICTUALS  is  derived  from  the  old  French 
^itaille^  and  was  formerly  ufed  in  the  fin 
gular  form,  vi&ual.  But  the  latter  is  now 
wholly  difufed,  and  vi&uah  generally  ufed 
With  a  fingular  verb  and  pronoun.  So 
Swift  ufes  the  word.  "  We  had  fuch  very 
fine  viffua/s  that  I  could  not  eat  //."f  The 

editor 


*THIS  word  is  not  ufed  in  modern  French  ;  but  its  de 
rivatives,  aviiailler,  avitailLment,  &c.  are  ilill  retaiiiedt 

f  CORRESPONDENCE,  letter  53, 


DISSERTATION    IV.      213 

editor  of  his  works  remarks,  that  here  Is 
falfe  concord ;  but  I  believe  Swift  has  fol 
lowed  the  general  praftice  of  the  Englifh. 
The  word  feems  to  have  loft  the  plurality 
of  ideas,  annexed  to  many  different  articles 
included  in  the  term,  and  to  have  affumed 
the  general  meaning  of  the  wordfooda  which 
does  not  admit  of  the  plural. 

THE  word  odds  feems  to  be  of  the  fame 
kind.  We  fometimes  find  a  plural  verb 
united  to  it,  as  in  Pope's  tranflation  of 
Homer  : 

"  ON  valor's  fide  the  odds  of  combat  lie, 
The  brave  live  glorious,  or  lamented  die," 
Iliad,  b.  15. 1.  670. 

BUT  in  common  practice  odds  is  confid- 
ered  as  in  the  fingular  number.  We  al 
ways  fay,  "  What  is  the  odds  ;"  and  I  fhould 
rank  this  among  the  words,  which,  altho 
they  have  the  termination  of  regular  plu 
rals,  more  properly  belong  to  the  fingular 
number. 

THE  word  gallows  is  evidently  of  this 
clafs.  "Let  a  gallows  be  made,"  fay  the 
tranflators  of  the  Bible,  with  perfe6l  pro 
priety.  Indeed  I  cannot  conceive  how  any 
man  who  has  read  Englifh  authors,  can 
this  word  as  in  the  plural. 

Q  3  BELLWS 


DISSERTATION    IV. 

BELLOWS,  tongs,  Jheers,  fcijjbrs,  Jhtiffett* 
pincers,  have  no  change  of  termination,  and 
it  is  the  pra£lice  to  prefix  to  them  the 
word  pair.  Yet  nbtwithftanding  thefe  ar 
ticles,  are  compofed  of  two  principal  parts, 
both  are  neceffary  to  form  a  fmgle  indivifi- 
ble  inftrument,  and  the  names  might  have 
been  confidered  as  nouns  in  the  fmgular.* 
Pair  is  more  properly  applied  to  two  fep- 
arate  articles  of  the  fame  kind,  and  ufed 
together;  &  fair  of  foots  >  or  gloves.  Cuf- 
tom,  however,  has  fanftioned  the  ufe  of  it 
before  the  words  juft  enumerated,  and 
therefore  a  pair  of  tongs,  &c.  muft  be  ad 
mitted  as  good  EngKlh.-f 

THERE  are  many  other  words  in  our 
language  which  have  the  plural  termina 
tion  ;  as  billiards,  ethics,  metaphyjics,  math-* 
ematics,  meajles,  hvfterics,  and  many  others  ^ 

which 

*  SOME  of  thefe  articles,  in  other  languages,  have  names 
in  the  fmgular  number,  as  in  Latin,  J  creeps,  pincers  ;  forftx, 
fheers  or  fciffors  ;  follis,  bellows.  In  Yrcnch,JcuJtct  is  fm 
gular,  and  pincettes,  plural.  A  bellows  is  fometimcs  heard  in 
£nglifli,  and  is  perfectly  correft. 

+  WILL  the  fame  authority  juftify  our  farmers  in  prefix^ 
ing  pair  to  a  fett  of  bars>  and  other  people,  in  prefixing  it  to 
flairs^  \vhen  there  are  five  or  fix  of  the  former,  and  perhaps 
twenty  of  the  latter?  A  pair  of  bars,  a  pair  of J 'airs,  in 
flriftnefs  of  fpeech,  are  very  abfurd  phrales  ;  but  perhap? 
it  is  better  to  admit  fuch  anomalies,  than  attempt  to  change 
univerial  and  immemorial  prafticc. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      tif 

which  properly  belong  to  the  fmgular 
number.-  Ethics  is  afcience>  is  better  Eng- 
iifh  than  ethics  are. 

ON  the  other  hand,  there  are  many 
words,  which,  without  ever  taking  the  plu 
ral  termination,  often  belong  to  the  plural. 
Sheep,  deer  and  hofe,  are  often  mentioned  as 
belonging  to  this  defcription.  To  thefe 
we  may  add  many  names  of  fifli ;  as  trout > 
falmon,  carp,  tench  and  others,  which  are  in 
fact  names  of  fpecies  >  but  which  apply  e^ 
qually  to  the  individuals  of  the  ipecies. 
We  fay  a  trout,  or  Jive  trout  •,  but  never  Jive 
t  routs.  - 

POSSESSIVE     CASE. 

IN  many  inftances  we  find  two  or  three 
words  ufed  to  defcribe  or  defignate  a  par 
ticular  perfon  or  thing  ;  in  which  cafe  they 
are  to  be  confidered  as  a  fingle  noun  or 
name,  and  the  fign  of  the  pofleffive  annex 
ed  to  the  laft  $  as,  "  the  King  of  Frances 
army." 

^  "FLETCHER  ofSaltonsplan  of  a  militia  dif 
fers  little  from  that  of  Harrington."* 

Home,  Sketch  9.  ARTICLE 

*"  TH  E  King  of  England's  court,  toto  nempc  ill?  aggregate, 
The  King  of  England^  tamquam  uni  fubflantivo  potponitu.x 
litera  forinativa  s" Wallis, 


216      DISSERTATION    IV, 

ARTICLE. 

MOST  grammarians  have  given  the  ar 
ticle  the  firft  rank  among  the  parts  of 
fpeech.  To  me  this  arrangement  appears 
very  incorrect  5  for  the  article  is  a  mere 
appendage  of  the  noun,  and  without  it 
cannot  even  be  defined.  The  noun  is  the 
primary  and  principal  part  of  fpeech,  of 
which  the  article,  pronoun  and  adjeftive  are 
mere  adjun6ts,  attendants,  or  fiibftitutes, 
and  the  latter  therefore  (hould  follow  the 
former  in  grammatical  order  and  definition. 

UNDER  this  head  I  will  introduce  a  few 
obfervations  on  the  ufe  of  a.  Grammari 
ans  have  fuppofed  that  a,  in  the  phrafes  a 
going,  a  hunting,  is  a. corruption  of  the  prep- 
ofition  on  ;  a  fuppofition,  which,  if  we  at 
tend  to  the  fenfe  of  the  phrafes,  appears 
highly  abfurd,  but  which  etymology,  in  a 
great  meafure,  overthrows. 

IN  the  firfl  place,  the  prepofition  is  not 
among  the  original  parts  of  language  -y  its 
ufe,  and  confequently  its  formation,  are  not 
neceffary  among  rude  nations  ;  it  is  a  part 
of  fpeech  of  a  late  date  in  the  progrefs  of 
language,  and  is  itfelf  a  derivative  from 

other 


DISSERTATION    IV.      217 

other  words.  I  have,  in  another  place,* 
given  fome  reafons  to  prove  an  to  be  an 
abbreviation  of  the  numeral  one,  or  top  one. 
It  is  very  evident  that  on  is  a  contraction 
of  upon,  which  was  formerly  written  up* 
-pone  ;  and  there  are  good  reafons  for  be 
lieving  the  latter  to  be  derived  from  top  me. 
In  addition  to  the  authorities  quoted  in 
the  Inftitute,  an  example  or  two  from 
Chaucer  will  almoft  place  the  queftion  be^ 
yond  a  doubt. 

fc  THERE  lith  on— i>p  myn  hed.'* 

Cant.  Tales,  4288. 

That  is,  there  lieth  one  upon  my  head  ; 
where  up  is  ufed  for  upon,  as  it  is  in  other 
places. 

«  No  ijiore,  up  pains  of  lefing  of  your  hed." 

Ibm.  1709. 

That  is,  upon  pain  of  lojing  your  head. 

THE  word  up  is  undoubtedly  but  a  cor-, 
ruption  of  /0/>,  or  a  noun  derived  from  the 
fame  root,  and  this  hypothecs  is  fupport- 
ed  by  the  true  theory  of  language  ;  which 
is,  that  rude  nations  converfe  moftly  by 
names.  Up  myn  hed,  is  top  mine  head.  An 
improvement  of  this  phrafe  would  be  the 

ufe 

? SECOND  part- of  the  Grammatical  Inftitute.  Tit.  Notes, 


DISSERTATION    IV. 


life  of  one,  ane  or  an,  to  afcertain  particu 
lar  things  ;  upponey  upon.  In  the  progrefs 
of  language,  thefe  words  would  be  con- 
trafted  into  on>  which  we  denominate  a 
prepofition. 

I  AM  very  fenfible  that  Chaucer  ufed  on 
in  the  manner  mentioned  by  Lowth  ; 
on  live  for  alive  ;  on  hunting  ;  on  hawking  ; 
which  would  feem  to  warrant  the  fuppofi- 
tion  of  that  writer,  that  a  is  a  contraction 
of  on,  confidering  on  originally  as  a  prepo- 
fition.  But  it  is  contrary  to  all  juft  ideas 
of  language  to  allow  fuch  a  primitive  part 
of  fpeech.  On  the  other  hand,  Chaucer 
ufes  on  for  other  purpofes,  which  cannot 
be  explained  on  Lowth's  hypothefis. 

<{  His  bredc,  his  ale,  was  alway  after  on." 

Cant.  Tales,  343. 

So  alfo  in  line  1783.  In  this  example 
on  is  allowed  on  all  hands  to  be  a  contrac 
tion  of  one  ;  after  one  (way,  manner)  that 
is,  alike,  or  in  the  fame  manner. 

cc  THEY  were  at  on  ;"  line  4195.  They 
were  at  one  -y  that  is,  together  or  agreed. 

"  EVER  in  on  ;"  line  1773,  and  3878  ; 
ever  in  one  (way,  courfe,  &c.)  that  is,  con 
tinually. 

IF 


DISSERTATION    IV.      219 

IF  therefore  we  fuppofe  on  to  be  merely 
a  corruption  of  one,  we  can  eafily  explain 
all  its  ufes.  On  hunting,  or  contraftedly, 
a  hunting,  is  one  hunting.  On  live,  on  life, 
or  alive*  is  merely  one  life.  This  form  of 
cxpreffion  is  very  natural,  however  child- 
ifh  or  improper  ittnay  appear  to  us.  It 
feems  very  obvious  to  refolve  ajhore,  abed, 
into  onjhore,  on  bed ;  but  even  Lowth  him- 
felf  would  be  puzzled  to  make  us  believe 
that  adry,  athirft,  came  from  on  dry,  on 
thirjl ;  and  Wallis  would  find  equal  difficulty 
to  convince  us  that  they  came  from  at  dry,  at 
Mr  ft.  If  we  fuppofe  a  to  be  a  contraflion 
of  one,  or  the  Saxon  ane  or  an,  the  folution 
of  all  thefe  phrafes  is  perfectly  eafy,  and 
correfponds  with  Home's  theory  of  the 
particles.  For  if  rude  nations  converfe 
without  particles,  they  muft  fay  go  Jhorey 
or  go  onefiore  ;  he  is  bed,  or  he  is  one  bed  ; 
be  is  dry,  or  one  dry  ;  I  am  thirjl,  or  lam  one 
thir/l.  Indeed  every  perfon  who  will  at 
tend  to  the  manner  of  fpeaking  among  the 
American  favages,  muft  believe  this  expla 
nation  of  the  phrafes  to  be  probably  juft. 

THAT  on  was  formerly  ufed  both  as  a 
prepofition  and  an  adjeftive,  is  acknowleg- 
ed  by  the  Editor  of  the  Britifh  Poets  }* 

but 

*  Cu AUGER'S  Wo rks,  Gloflary,  p.  151. 


220      DISSERTATION    IV: 

but  its  ufes  in  all  cafes  may  be  eafily  ex 
plained  on  the  fmgle  principle  before  men* 
tioned. 

THIS  hypothefis  however  will  be  con 
firmed  by  the  faft,  that  the  Englifh  article 
#,  "  is  nothing  more  than  a  corruption  of 
the  Saxon  adjeftive,  ane  or  an  (one)  before 
a  fubftantive  beginning  with  a  confonant." 
Editor  of  Chaucer's  works,  doff.  p.  23, 
And  the  article  a  and  the  numeral  one  have 
ftill  the  fame  fignification.  That  ane  or 
an,  and  one  are  originally  the  fame,  is  a 
ppint  not  to  be  controverted.  We  have 
therefore  the  ftrongeft  reafon  to  believe  that 
a  in  the  phrafes  a  golng^  a  hunting^  afifoing 
is  derived  from  one.  Ony  as  a  contraction 
of  upon,  has,  in  modern  language,  a  differ 
ent  fenfe,  and  cannot  be  well  fubftituted 
for  a  -,  for  on  golng^  onffiing,  have  an  awk 
ward  appearance  and  will  not  obtain  in 
the  language,  to  the  exclufion  of  a  going* 
a  fijhing.  The  vulgar  praftice  is  more 
correct  than  Lowth's  cbrreftion,  and  ought 
by  no  means  to  be  rejected. 

" O  LET  my  life,  if  thou  fo  many  deaths  a  coming  find, 
With  thine  old  year  its  voyage  take.-''— 

Cowley's  Ode  to  the  New  Year. 

«  BUT  thefe  fantaflic  errors  of  our  dream, 

Lead  us  to  folid  wrong  ; 

We  pray  God,  our  friend's  torments  to  prolong, 


DISSERTATION    IV. 

And  wifh  uncharitably  for  them, 

To  be  as  long  a  dying  as  Methufalem." 

Cow  ley. 

IF  the  foregoing  opinion  of  the  origin 
of  a  in  fuch  phrafes,  fliould  not  be  deemed 
fatisfaftory,  we  may  perhaps  afcribe  its  or 
igin  to  a  mere  cuftom  of  forming  expletive 
founds  in  the  tranfition  from  one  word  to 
another.* 

THE  following  phrafes,  three  Jbillings  a 
piece,  a  day,  a  head,  a  bujhel,  it  is  faid  are 
elliptical  forms  of  fpeech  >  fome  prepofi- 
tion  being  implied,  as,  for  or  by.  This 
aflertion  ean  proceed  only  from  an  imper- 
fe6l  view  of  the  fubjeft.  Unlefs  gramma* 
rians  can  prove  that  fome  prepofition  was 
formerly  ufed,  which  is  now  omitted,  they 
cannot  prove  that  any  is  implied,  nor 
fhould  they  have  recourfe  to  implication  to 
find  a  rule  to  parfe  the  phrafes.  The  truth 
is,  no  fuch  prepofition  can  be  found,  nor 
is  their  need  of  any.  A*  in  this  form  of 

fpeech, 

*THE  Editor  of  Chaucer's  Works  before  mentioned, 
remarks,  "  that  a,  in  compofition  with  words  of  Saxon  o- 
riginal,  is  an  abbreviation  of  af  or  of,  at,  on  or  in ;  and  oft 
en  a  corruption  of  the  prepofitive  particle  ge  or y."  Ac 
cording  to  this  writer,  a  is  any  thing  and  every  thing  ; 
it  has  fo  many  derivations  and  ufes,  that  it  has  no  certain 
derivation  or  meaning  at  all.  In  the  phrafe  a  coming,  a 
feems  now  to  be  a  mere  expletive  ;  but  otherwife  a,  one, 
and  an  have  the  lame  meaning  in  ail  cafes, 


222      DISSERTATION    IV. 

fpecch,  carries  the  full  meaning  of  the  Lat 
in  -per,  and  the  fubftitution  of  the  latter, 
for  want,  as  it  is  faid,  of  an  Englifh  word, 
in  the  phrafes,  per  day,  per  head,  per  pound \ 
is  a  burlefque  upon  the  Englifh.  to  this 
day.  We  fee  continually  a  wretched  jar 
gon  of  Latin  and  Englifh  in  every  mer 
chant's  book,  even  to  the  exclufion  of  a 
pure  Englifh  phrafe,  more  concife,  more 
correft,  and  more  elegant.  It  is  to  be 
wifhed  that  a  might  be  reftored  to  its  true 
dignity,  as  it  is  ufed  by  fome  of  the  purefl 
Engtifh  writers. 

"  HE  had  read  almoft  conftantly,  twelve 
or  fourteen  hours  a  day  •"  that  is,  one  day. 
Bollmgbroke  on  Hiftory,  letter  4. 

cc  To  the  fixteen  fcholars  twenty  pounds 
a  piece"  •  •  Cowley. 

THIS  is  pure  elegant  Englifh,  and  the 
common  people  have  the  honor  of  preferv- 
ing  it,  unadulterated  by  foreign  words. 

VERB, 

THE  moft  difficult  branch  of  this  fub~ 
je6l  is  the  verb.  Next  to  the  noun,  this 
is  the  moft  important  part  of  fpeech,  and 
as  it  includes  all  the  terms  by  which  we 

exprefs 


DISSERTATION    IV.      223 

cxprefs  aftion  and  exiftence,  in  their  num- 
berlefs  varieties,  it  muft,  in  all  languages, 
be  very  comprehenfive. 

THE  Englifh  verb  fuffers  very  few  in 
flections  or  changes  of  termination,  to  ex- 
prefs  the  different  circumftances  of  perfon, 
number,  time  and  mode.  Its  inflections 
are  confined  to  the  three  peribns  of  the 
fmgular  number,  in  the  prefent  tenfe,  in 
dicative  mode,  and  the  firft  and  fecond  per- 
fons  of  the  part  tenfe  ;  unlefs  we  confider 
the  irregular  participles  as  *B  fpecies  of  in- 
fleftion  belonging  to  the  verb.  All  the 
other  varieties  of  perfoii,  number,  time  and 
mode,  are  expreffed  by  prefixing  other 
words,  by  various  combinations  of  words, 
or  by  a  particular  manner  of  utterance. 

THIS  fimplicity,  as  it  is  erroneoufly  call 
ed,  is  faid  to  render  our  language  eafy  of 
acquifition.  The  reverfe  however  of  this 
is  true  ;  for  the  ufe  of  auxiliaries  or  com 
binations  of  words,*  conftitutes  the  moft 
perplexing  branch  of  grammar ;  it  being 
much  eafier  to  learn  to  change  the  ter 
mination  of  the  verb,  than  to  combine 
two,  three  or  four  words  for  the'  fame 
purpofe. 

GRAMMARIANS 


224      DISSERTATION    IV. 

GRAMMARIANS  have  ufually  divided  the 
Englifh  verbs  into  aftive^  pa/five  and  neu* 
tzr.  "A£ti<ve  verbs,"  fay  they,*  <c  exprefs 
aftion,  and  necetfarily  imply  an  agent  and 
an  objeft  afted  upon."  But  is  not  a  man 
fajfive  in  hearing  ?  Yet  hear  is  called  an 
verb. 


Cf  A  VERB  neuter  expreffes  being,  or  a 
ftate  or  condition  of  being  j  when  the  a- 
gent  and  object  coincide,  and  the  event  is 
properly  neither  aftioii  nor  paffion,  but 
rather  fomething  between  both."  But  is 
there  neither  affion  nor  paffion  in  walking^ 
running,  exifting  ?  One  would  think  that 
running  at  leaft  might  be  called  afflion. 

THE  common  definitions,  copied,  in 
fome  meafure,  from  the  Latin  Grammars, 
are  very  inaccurate.  The  moft  correft 
and  general  divifion  of  Englifh  verbs,  is^ 
into  tranjitive  and  intranjitive  ;  the  former 
term  comprehending  all  verbs  that  may  be 
followed  by  any  objeft  receiving  the  ac 
tion,  or  of  which  any  thing  is  affirmed  ; 
the  latter,  all  thofe  verbs,  the  affirmation 
in  which  is  limited  to  the  agent.  Thus 
hear  is  a  tranfiti've  verb,  for  it  affirms 
fomething  of  an  obje6l  ;  /  hear  the  bell  ; 

Run 

*LOWTH'S  Introdu&ion.  Tit.  verb, 


DISSERTATION     IV.       225 

Run  is  an  intranfitive  verb,  for  the  aftion 
mentioned  is  confined  to  the  agent  -y  he 
runs.  Yet  the  laft  is  an  attive  verb,  and 
the  firft,  ftrictly  fpeaking,  is  not  •*  fo  that 
there  is  a  dirtinftion  to  be  made  between  a 
verb  affiive  and  tranfaive* 

IN  ftri6t  propriety,  we  have  in  Englifh 
no  paffive  verb  ;  that  is,  we  have  no  fmgle 
word  which  conveys  the  idea  of  paffion  or 
fuffering,  in  the  manner  of  the  Greek  or 
Latin  paffive  verb.  It  may  be  ufeful,  in 
teaching  Englifh  to  youth  or  foreigners,  to 
exhibit  a  fpecimen  of  the  combinations  of 
the  verb  be,  with  the  participles  of  other 
verbs  in  all  their  varieties  ;  but  each  word 
fhould  be  parfed  as  a  diftinft  part  of  fpeech ; 
altho  two  or  more  may  be  neceffary  to  con 
vey  an  idea  which  is  expreffed  by  a  fingle 
word  in  another  language. 

TIME. 

TIME  is  naturally  divided  into  paft, 
prefent  and  future.  The  Englifh  verb  has 
but  two  variations  of  ending  to  exprefs 
time  5  the  prefent,  as  love,  write  \  and  the 

paft, 

*RUN,  like  many  other  verbs,  may  be  ufed  either  tranfi- 
tively  or  intraniitively.     Simply  fa  run>  is  intnmfuive  ;  ts 
j  tranfitive. 

p 


226      DISSERTATION    IV. 

paft,  as  loved,  'wrote.  The  ufual  divifioii 
of  tenfes,  or  combinations  of  words  cor- 
refponding  to  the  Latin  tenfes,  is  not  whol 
ly  accurate.  The  definition  of  the  fecond 
tenfe,  in  the  ordinary  arrangement  of  them 
in  Latin  grammars,  may  be  correft,  as  it 
relates  to  the  Roman  tongue ;  but  does  not 
apply  to  the  Englifh  tenfe,  which  is  com 
monly  called  by  the  fame  name,  the  Im~ 
perfect.  The  Latin  words  movebam,  lege- 
bam,  are  tranflated  /  moved,  I  read.  Now 
the  Englifti  words  exprefs  aftions  perfectly 
paft)  and  therefore  the  time  or  tenfe  cannot  be 
juftly  denominated  imperfect.  If  the  Latin 
words  expreffed,  in  the  Roman  tongue,  ac 
tions  imperfectly  pajl,  they  fhould  be  ren 
dered  by  us,  /  was  moving,  was  reading, 
which  convey  ideas  of  aftions,  as  taking 
place  at  fome  preceding  period,  but  not 
then  paft.  In  this  fenfe,  the  name  of  the 
tenfe  might  have  been  ufed  with  propriety. 
But  the  Englifh  form  of  expreffion,  be 
moved,  conveys  the  idea  of  an  a6lion  com 
pletely  paft,  and  does  not  fall  within  the 
definition  of  the  Latin  Imperfect. 

IT  is  furprizing  that  the  great  Lowth 
ftiould  rank  this  form  of  the  verb,  they 
moved,  under  the  head  of  indefinite  or  unde 
termined  time  i  and  yet  place  this  form, 

have 


DISSERTATION    IV.      227 

have  moved,  or  what  is  called  the  perfeft 
tenfe,  under  the  head  of  definite  or  -deter 
mined  time.  The  truth  is,  the  firft  is  the 
moft  definite,  1  have  loved,  or  moved,  ex- 
preffes  an  aftion  performed  and  complet 
ed,  generally  within  a  period  of  time  not 
far  diftant ;  but  leaves  the  particular  point 
of  time  wholly  indefinite  or  undetermined. 
On  the  other  hand,  I  loved  is  neceflarily 
employed,  when  a  particular  period  or  point 
of  time  is  fpecified.  Thus  it  is  correct  to 
fay,  /  read  a  book  yejlerday,  lajl  week,  ten 
years  ago,  &c.  but  it  is  not  grammatical  to 
fay,  I  have  read  a  book  yejier  day,  la  ft  week, 
&c.  fo  that,  direftly  contrary  to  Lowth's 
rule,  I  moved,  is  the  definite,  and  I  have  mov 
ed,  the  indefinite  time. 

GREAT  inaccuracy  is  likewife  indulged 
in  the  ufual  defcription  of  the  Englifh  fu 
ture  tenfe.  There  is  no  variation  of  the 
verb  to  exprefs  a  future  action ;  to  remedy 
this  defeft,  the  Englifh  ufey7W/  and  <willy 
before  the  verb  in  its  radical  form.  But 
thefe  words  are  both  in  the  prefent  time  ; 
being  merely  the  Teutonic  verbs  follen  and 
ivollen,  which  formerly  had,  and  in  the 
German  ftill  have,  moft  of  the  inflexions 
of  regular  verbs.  Thus  : 

Ind. 
P  2 


'    4 


228      DISSERTATION    IV. 

Ind.  Pref.  Icb  foil,  I  ought  or  fhould.    Icb 
.,  I  will. 


Imp.  Ichfollt,  I  ought  or  fhould.  Ich  wollt, 
I  would. 

Preter.  Icb  babe  gefollt,  I  ought  or  fhould 
have.  Ich  babe  gewollt,  I  would  or 
would  have,  &c.  &c.* 


f: 


/  WILL  go  is  really  nothing  more  than  a 
prefent  prqmife  of  a  future  aftion.  \Jhall 

o  is  a  prefent  prediction  of  a.  future  a£tion. 

n  the  fecond  and  third  perfons,  will  ex- 
prefles  the  prediftion  j  and  as  one  cannot 
promife  for  a  fecond  or  third  perfon,  yZW/, 
in  thefe  perfons,  implies  a  promife  of  the 
firft  perfon,  that  he  will  command  or  oblige 
the  fecond  or  third  perfon  to  do  an  aftion 
in  fome  future  time.  The  whole  may  be 
thus  explained  : 

I  will  go, 

Is  my  own  prefent  promife  to  do  a  future 
aftion. 

fhoit 

*  Lo  WTH  obferves  a  diftinftion  between  the  verb  to  will, 
and  the  auxiliary,  zcitt ;  the  firft  being  regularly  inflc&ed, 
/  will,  thou  willtfl,  he.  wills,  and  the  latter,  /  will^  thou  wilt, 
ht  will.  But  altho  this  diilinftion  aciually  exifts  in  modern 
prafticej  yet  the  words  are,  in  both  cafes,  the  fame — derived 
from  the  fame  root,  and  ftill  retaining  nearly  the  fame 
meaning. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      229 

Thou  wilt  go — He  will  go, 

Are  my  (the  fpeaker's)  prefent  predi&ions 
that  the  perfons  mentioned  will  do  a  fu 
ture  aftion  ;  or  perhaps  more  properly,  a 
declaration  of  their  inclination  or  intention. 

IJhall  go, 
Is  my  prefent  prediftion  of  a  future  aftion. 

Tbcujbalt  go — Hejba/lgo, 

Are  my  (the  fpeaker's)  prefent  promife  that 
the  fecond  and  third  perfons  will  do  a  fu 
ture  adlion.  But  as  a  man  cannot  compel 
a  fuperior,  he  can  promife  only  for  him- 
felf  or  inferiors  ;  therefore  thefe  laft  ex- 
preffions  imply  a  promife  in  the  fpeaker, 
and  a  right  to  command  the  fecond  and 
third  perfons  to  do  the  thing  promifed ;  for 
which  reafon  they  are  ufed  only  in  addreff- 
ing  or  fpeaking  of,  inferiors  or  fubje£ls. 
The  fame  remarks  apply  to  the  three  per 
fons  in  the  plural  number. 

HENCE  we  obferve  the  inaccuracy  of 
tranflating  the  future  \enfe  of  the  Greeks, 
Romans,  and  French,  by  jhall  or  will  in 
differently.  It  is  probable  that  the  future 
tenfe  in  thofe  languages,  and  perhaps  in 
others,  where  the  tenfe  is  formed  by  in- 
fleftions,  was  employed  merely  to  foretell. 
P3  If 


230      DISSERTATION    IV. 

If  fo,  Jball  only  fhould  be  ufed  in  the  firft 
perfon  of  the  Englifh  tranflation,  and 
willy  in  the  fecond  and  third.  Thus  : 


Latin,,  French> 

Habebo,         J'aurai,  I  fhall  have. 

Habebimus,  nous  aurons,  we  fhall  have. 
Habebis,        tu  auras,         thou  wilt  have. 
Habebit,        il  aura,  he  will  have. 

Habebitis,      vous  aurez,     you  will  have. 
Ilabebunt,     ils  auront,       they  will  have, 

ON  the  other  hand,  a  promife  in  the  firft 
perfon  expreffed  in  Englifh  by  willy  and  a 
promife  or  command  in  the  fecond  and 
third,  expreffed  by  Jball,  feem,  in  thefe  lan 
guages,  to  be  communicated  by  other  words 
or  a  circumlocution.  • 

IN  ftriftnefs  of  fpeech  therefore,  wre  have 
no  future  tenfe  of  the  verb  in  Englifh  j 
but  we  ufe  auxiliaries,  which,  in  the  pref- 
ent  tenfe,  exprefs  a  prediction  of  an  aftion, 
or  a  difpofition  of  mind  to  produce  an  ac 
tion.  Thefe  auxiliaries,  united  with  the 
verb  or  affirmation,  anfwer  the  purpofes  of 
the  future  tenfes  of  verbs  in  other  lan 
guages  -,  and  no  inconvenience  can  arife 
from  calling  fuch  a  combination  a  tenfe. 

MODE 


DISSERTATION    IV.      231 

MODE, 

MOST  languages  are  fo  conftru&ed, 
that  the  verbs  change  their  terminations 
for  the  purpofe  of  expreffing  the  manner  of 
being  or  aftion.  In  this  particular,  the 
Englifh  is  fmgular  >  there  being  but  one 
inflection  of  a  tingle  verb,  which  can  be 
faid  to  be  peculiar  to  the  conditional  or 
fubjunftive  mode.*  In  all  other  refpefts, 
the  verbs  in  the  declaratory  and  condition 
al  modes  are  the  fame  j  and  the  condition 
is  known  only  by  fome  other  word  prefix 
ed  to  the  verb. 

IT  is  aftoniftiing  to  fee  how  long  and 
how  ftupidly  Englifh  grammarians  have 
followed  the  Latin  grammars  in  their  di- 
vifions  of  time  and  mode  ;  but  in  particu 
lar  the  latter.  By  this  means,  we  often  find 
may*  can,  Jhould  and  mujl  in  a  conditional 
mode,  when  they  are  pofitive  declarations 
and  belong  to  the  indicative.  All  uncon 
ditional  declarations,  whether  of  an  aftion, 
or  of  a  right,  power  or  neceflity  of  doing  an 
aftion,  belong  to  the  indicative  -y  and  the 
diftin£lion  between  the  indicative  and  po 
tential  is  totally  ufelefs.  Should  is  com 
monly 

*  IF  I  zutre9  thou  zoert>  he  zucre,  in  the  prefent  hypothetical 
tenfe  qf  the  fubjunclive  mode,  arc  not  uied  in  the  indicative. 


232      DISSERTATION    IV. 

monly  placed  in  the  imperfeft  time  of  the 
fubjundive  -,  yet  is  frequently  ufed  to  ex- 
prefs  an  unconditional  obligation,  as  he 
Jkould  go  ;  and  belongs  to  the  prefent  time 
of  the  indicative,  as  much  as  he  cugkt,  or 
the  French  ilfaut  or  il  doit, 

WOULD  is  fometirnes  employed  in  a  de 
claratory  fenfe  to  exprefs  a  prefent  volition, 
and  then  belongs  to  the  indicative.  In  the 
paft  time,  Jhould^  would \  might 5  could r,  often 
exprefs  unconditional  ideas,  and  belong  to 
the  indicative.  In  fhort,  the  ufual  ar 
rangement  of  the  Englifti  verbs  and  auxil 
iaries  in  our  grammars  is  calculated  to  per 
plex  and  miflead  a  learner;  and  I  have 
never  found  a  foreigner  who  could  ufe 
them  with  tolerable  propriety. 

NUMBER  and  PERSON. 

UNDER  this  head,  I  fhall  remark  on  a 
fingle  article  only,  the  ufe  of  you  in  the 
fingular  number,  with  a  plural  verb.  The 
ufe  of  the  plural  ncs  and  <vos,  for  ego  and  tu 
in  Latin  $  of  nous  and  vous  forje  and  tu  in 
French ;  feems  to  have  been  very  ancient, 
and  to  have  been  originally  intended  to 
foitcn  the  harfhneis  of  egotifm,  or  to  make 
a  refpeclful  diftinftion  in  favor  of  great 

perfonages. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      233 

perfonages.  But  the  praftice  became  gen 
eral  in  the  French  nation,  was  introduced 
by  them  into  England,  and  gradually  imi 
tated  by  the  Englifh  in  their  own  tongue. 
You,  in  familiar  difcourfe,  is  applied  to  an 
individual,  except  by  a  fingle  feft  of  chrift- 
ians  ;  the  praftice  is  general  and  of  long 
ftanding  ;  it  has  become  correft  Englifh, 
and  ought  to  be  confidered,  in  grammar, 
as  a  pronoun  in  the  fmgular  number.  It 
may  be  objefted,  that  we  unite  with  it  a 
verb  in  the  plural  number,  you  are>  you 
have ,  this  is  true,  but  the  verb,  in  thefe  in- 
ftances,  becomes  fmgular  ;  and  both  the 
pronoun  and  verb  ihould  be  placed  in  the 
fingular  number. 

IN  the  union  of  you  with  a  plural  verb 
in  the  prefent  time,  we  are  all  unanimous; 
but  in  the  paft  time,  there  is  a  difference 
between  books  and  common  praftice  in  a 
fingle  inftance.  In  books,  you  is  common 
ly  ufed  with  the  plural  of  the  verb  be,  you 
were  ;  in  converfation,  it  is  generally  fol 
lowed  by  the  fmgular,  you  was.  Notwith- 
ftanding  the  criticifms  of  grammarians, 
the  antiquity  and  univerfality  of  this  prac 
tice  muft  give  it  the  fanclion  of  propriety; 
for  what  but  practice  forms  a  language  ? 
This  practice  is  not  merely  vulgar  ;  it  is 

general 


234      DISSERTATION    IV. 

general  among  men  o£  erudition  who  do 
not  affeft  to  be  fettered  by  the  rules  of 
grammarians,  and  fome  late  writers  have 
indulged  it  in  their  publications.  I.fliould 
therefore  infieft  the  verb  be  in  the  paft  time 
after  this  manner ;  I  was,  thou  waft,  or  you 
was,  he  was,  &c.  Whatever  objeftions 
may  be  raifed  to  this  inflection,  it  is  the 
language  of  the  E?2glijhy  and  rules  can  hard 
ly  change  a  general  praftice  of  fpeaking  $ 
nor  would  there  be  any  advantage  in  the 
change,  if  it  could  be  effe6led. 

AUXILIARIES. 

THERE  are  feveral  verbs  in  Englifh, 
which,  from  the  neceffity  of  their  union  with 
other  verbs,  have  obtained  the  name  of 
auxiliaries.  Originally  they  were  principal 
verbs,  with  regular  Saxon  infinitives,  and 
the  ufual  inflections ;  as  may  be  obierved  by 
any  perfon,  who  has  the  fmalleft  acquaint 
ance  with  the  modern  German,  which  re 
tains  more  of  the  ancient  ftrufture,  than 
any  other  branch  of  the  primitive  language. 

THE  verbs,  called  auxiliaries  or  helpers, 
are  do,  be>  have,  foall,  will,  may,  can,  muft. 
The  three  firft  are  often  employed  alone, 
and  are  therefore  acknowleged  to  be  fome- 
times  principal  verbs.  That  the  others 

were  . 


PISSERTATION    IV. 

were  fo,  will  be  made  obvious  by  a  fpedU 
men  from  the  German,  with  the  corref* 
ponding  Englifh. 

German,  Engtijh, 

Inf,          Wollen,  to  will. 

Ind.Pref.  Ich  will,  I  will. 

Wir  wollen,*       we  will. 
Imper.     Ich  wolte,  I  would. 

Preterit.  Ich  habe  gewolt,  I  have  wouldjOi 

willed. 

Plup,       Ich  hatte  gewolt,  I  had  would. 
Put.         Ich  werde  wollen,  I  lhall  will, 
Imp.         Wolle  du,  will  thou. 

Subj,        Ich  wolle^  (if)  Iwould^&c. 

Inf.          Wollen,  to  will. 

Gewolte  haben,    to  have  would, 

or  willed. 

Wollend,  willing. 

Gewollte,  having  would, 

or  willed, 


to  fhall,  is  inflected  in  the  fame 
manner.  Koennen,  to  can,  or  be  able,  is 
inflefted  much  in  the  fame  manner.  Ich 
kann^  I  can,  &c.  Imperfeft,  Ich  konnte,  I 
could.  Preterit,  Ich  habe  gehonnty  I  have 
could  (or  -been  able.)  Participle,  K&n- 
nendy  canning,  being  able.  Thus  mcegen,  to 

may, 

*  IT  has  been  before  obferved,  that  the  common  people 
}iavc  not  wholly  left  this  pronunciation,  taollj  to  this  da\-. 


236      DISSERTATION    IV. 

may,  makes,  in  the  paft  tenfes,  Ich  mochte, 
I  might  or  mought,  as  the  vulgar  fome- 
times  pronounce  it  ;  Ich  babe  gemocht,  I 
have  might.  Miift  alfo,  which  in  Englifh 
has  loft  all  inflection,  is  varied  in  the  Ger 
man  ;  mujjerij  to  muft,  or  be  obliged  ;  Im- 
perfeft,  Ich  mufte,  I  muft,  or  was  obliged. 

BUT  whatever  thefe  verbs  may  have  once 
been,  yet  from  their  lofs  of  feveral  inflec 
tions  and  the  participles,  with  thpr  fingu- 
lar  ufe  in  combination  with  other  verbs, 
they  may  very  well  be  denominated  auxili 
ary  verbs.  Their  true  force  in  Englifli 
fhould  be  afcertained  and  explained  in 
grammars  for  the  benefit  of  karners,  and 
particularly  for  the  afliftance  of  foreign 
ers  -*  yet  in  refolving  fentences,  each  fhould 
be  confidered  as  a  verb  Qr  diftinft  part  of 
fpeech. 

FOR  want  of  a  clear  and  accurate  knowl- 
ege  of  the  Englifh  auxiliaries,  foreigners 
are  apt  to  fall  into  material  errors  in  con- 
ftru6ting  fentences.  The  moft  numerous 
errors  appear  in  the  ufe  of  will  andjha!/, 
and  their  inflections.  The  Scots  and  I- 
rilh,  even  of  the  iirft  rank,  generally  ufe 


*  SEE  the  fecond  part  of  the  Grammatical  Inftitute,  Ap 

pendix, 


DISSERTATION    IV. 


for  flail  in  the  firft  perfon  ;  by  which 
means,  they  fubftitute  a  promife  for  an  in 
tended  prediction.  Several  errors  of  this 
kind  have  efcaped  the  notice  of  the  mofl 
celebrated  writers. 

cc  WITHOUT  having  attended  to  this,  we 
will  be  at  a  lofs  in  underftanding  feveral 
paflages  in  the  claffics,  which  relate  to  the 
public  fpeaking,  and  the  theatrical  enter 
tainments  of  the  ancients."  -  Blair's  Lec 
tures,  p.  48.  Philad.  edit. 

<c  IN  the  Latin  language,  there  are  no 
two  words,  we  'would  more  readily  take  to 
be  fynonimous,  than  amare  and  diligere'\ 
-  The  fame,  p.  83. 

IN  thefe  and  feveral  other  inftances 
which  occur  in  Blairs  writings,  the  words 
will  and  would  are  ufed  very  improperly, 
for  /hall  and  ftould.  The  author  means. 
only  to  foretell  certain  events,  and  has  em 
ployed  words  which  carry,  to  an  Englilh 
ear,  the  full  force  of  a  promife. 

ENGLISH  writers  have  rarely  fallen  into 
this  error  ;  yet  a  few  inftances  may  be 
found  in  authors  of  reputation. 

"  IF  I  draw  a  catgut  or  any  other  cord 
to  a  great  length  between  my  fingers,  I 


S3§      DISSERTATION    IV. 

will  make  it  (mailer  than  it  was  before," 
&c.— -Goldfmith's  Survey  of  Experi 
mental  Philofophy,  book  2,  chap.  2. 

IN  the  middle  and  fouthern  ftates  of  A- 
merica,  this  error  is  frequent,  both  in  writ 
ing  and  converfation. 

"  LET  us  fuppofe  the  charter  repealed 
and  the  bank  annihilated  ;  -will  we  be  bet 
ter  fituated  ?" Argument  againft  re 
pealing  the  charter  of  the  Bank  of  North 
America. 

THIS  is  very  incorreft  ;  there  is  hardly 
a  poffible  cafe,  in  which  will  can  be  prop 
erly  employed  to  afk  a  queftion  in  the  firft 
perfon. 

<c  As  foon  as  the  diploma  is  made  out,  I 
•will  have  the  honor  to  tranfmit  it  to  you." 
Letter  to  Count  Rochambeau. 

Is  not  this  promijing  to  have  the  honor  of 
a  communication,  an  engagement  which 
delicacy  forbids  ?  It  is  impoffible  for  a  for 
eigner  to  have  a  juft  idea  of  the  abfurdity 
of  ufmg  i&ill  in  this  manner ;  but  a  correct 
Englifii  ear  revolts  at  the  practice. 

DR.  Prieftley  obferves  veryjuftly,  that 
the  form  of  the  auxiliaries,  Jball, 

which 


DISSERTATION    IV. 

which  is  generally  conditional,  viz.  fhould 
and  would,  is  elegantly  ufed  to  exprefs  a 
flight  affertion,  with  modeft  diffidence. 

<c  THE  royal  power,  it  fhould  feem^  might 
be  intrufted  in  their  hands/'— —Hume's 
Hiftory,  vol.  3.  p.  383. 

WE  fay  alfo,  ct  I  'would  not  choofe  any/* 
In  thefe  cafes,  the  verbs  are  not  condition 
al  ;  they  modeftly  declare  a  fa£t,  and  there 
fore  properly  belong  to  the  indicative  mode. 
But  in  the  following  paflfage,^^  is  im 
properly  employed  : 

"  IN  judging  only  from  the  nature  of 
things,  and  without  the  furer  aid  of  di 
vine  revelation,  one  jhould  be  apt  to  em 
brace  the  opinion  of  Diodorus  Siculus," 

&c. Warburton's  Divine  Legation,  vol. 

2.  p.  8 i. 

SHOULD,  in  the  fecond  and  third  per- 
fons,  expreffes  dutyy  and  the  idea  of  the  au 
thor  was,  to  exprefs  an  event,  under  a  con 
dition,  or  a  modeft  declaration  ;  \\tjhould 
have  ufed  would. 

<c  THERE  is  not  a  girl  in  town,  but  let  her 
have  her  will  in  going  to  a  malk,  and  fhc 
s  as  a  fliepherdefs.- — "Speft.  No.  9. 


24o      DISSERTATION    IV. 


in  this  example,  exprefTes  com* 
mand,  an  idea  very  different  from  the  au 
thor's  meaning. 

"  THINK  what  refle&ionyfctf//  moft  prob 
ably  arife."  -  Blair,  Serm.  9. 

<c  A  PERSON,  highly  entertained  at  a 
play,  flail  remember  perfeftly  the  impref- 
iion  made  on  him  by  a  very  moving  fcene." 
—  —  Nugent's  Tranf.  of  Condillac,  p.  i  .  f.  i  . 

I  WOULD  juft  remark  here,  that  the  er 
rors  in  the  ufe  of  the  auxiliary  verbs  be 
fore  mentioned,  are  not  Englifh  ;  that  they 
are  little  known  among  the  inhabitants  of 
South  Britain,  and  ftill  lefs  among  their 
defcendants  in  New  England.  This  is  a 
new  proof  of  the  force  of  national  cuf- 
toms.  I  do  not  remember  to  have  heard 
once  in  the  courfe  of  my  life,  an  improper 
ufe  of  the  verbs  will  andjhal/,  among  the 
unmixed  Englifh  defcendants  in  the  eaft- 
ern  flates. 

BUT  of  all  the  errors  or  inaccuracies  in 
fpeaking  or  writing  the  Englifh  language, 
the  moft  numerous  clafs  appear  in  the  im 
proper  ufe  of  verbs  in  the  fubjunflive 
mode.  Not  only  illiterate  men,  but  au 
thors  of  the  firft  rank,  often  ufe  the  pref- 

ent 


DISSERTATION    IV.      241 

cnt  tenfe  for  the  future,  the  future  for  the 
prefent,  and  the  paft  for  both. 

"  IF  any  member  absents  himfelf,  he 
fliall  forfeit  a  penny  for  the  ufe  of  the  club, 
unlefs  in  cafe  of  ficknefs  and  imprifon- 

ment."- ^Rules  of  the  Two  Penny  Club, 

Speft.  No.  9. 

"  IF  thou  negleSieft  or  doft  unwillingly 
what  I  command,  I'll  rack  thee  with  old 
cramps." -Temp,  aft  j.  f.  4. 

IN  both  thefe  examples,  the  events  men 
tioned  in  the  verbs  are  future  ;  "  if  any 
member  Jhall  abfent  himfelf;"    "if  thou 
Jhalt  negleft  -"  therefore  the  auxiliary  verb 
Jhall  ftiould  have  been  employed,  or  the 
fentences  ihould  have  beer  elliptical,  "  if 
any  member  abfent  himfelf ;"  "  if  thou  ne- 
glett  •"  where  Jhall  is  underftood  and  eafi- 
ly  lupplied  by  the  reader* 

NUMBERLESS  examples  of  the  fame  kind 
of  inaccuracy  may  be  found  in  good  au 
thors.  Thus  in  Haley's  Happy  Prefcrip- 
tion,  act  2. 

"  AND  if  my  fcheme  profpers,  with  joy  I'll  confefs, 
What  a  \vhimfical  trifle  produced  our  fuccefs." 

THE  idea  is,  "  if  my  fcheme  jball  prof- 
per  5"  and  this  is  obvious  by  the  fubfequent 


242      DISSERTATION    IV. 

part  of  the  fentence,  where  the  future  is 
employed,  "with joy  777 confefs." 

<c  IP  Punch  grows  extravagant,  I  fhall 
reprimand  him  very  freely  ;  if  the  ftage 
becomes  a  nurfery  of  folly  and  impertinence, 
I  fhall  not  be  afraid  to  animadvert  upon 
it" Speft.  No.  35. 

THESE  fhould  have  been  grow  or  Jhould 
grow  ;  become  or  jhould  become. 

"  IF  any  thing  offers  (fhall  offer)  from 
Dublin,  that  may  ferve  either  to  fatisfy 

or  divert  you,  I  will  not  fail,"  &c. 

Swift's  Correfp.  letter  a. 

IN  the  following  paflfage,  the  fame  writ 
er  is  much  more  correft. 

cc  IF  any  one  matter  in  it  prove  (that  is, 
Jball  prove)  falfe,  what  do  you  think  will 
become  of  the  paper  ?" -Letter  8. 

BUT  the  ufe  of  the  future  for  the  pref- 
ent  is  much  more  frequent. 

"  IF  reverence,  gratitude,  obedience  and 

confidence  be  our  duty." Prieftley,  let. 

7  to  a  Phil.  Unbeliever. 

"  IF  he  have  any  knowlege  of  aftual  ex- 
iftence,  he  muft  be  fatisfied." Same, 

letter  8. 

THE 


lilSSfeRTATION    IV.      243 

THE  author  doiibtlefs  intended  thefe  fen- 
tences  to  be  ftriftly  grammatical,  by  plac 
ing  the  verbs  in  the  prefent  tenfe  of  the 
fubjunftive.  But  in  the  firft  example,  be  is 
wrong  even  on  Lowth's  principles.  The  rule 
of  the  Bifhop,  with  refpeft  to  the  life  of  the 
indicative  and  fubjunftive  modes,  is  this  : 
That  when  fomething  conditional,  hypo 
thetical,  or  doubtful,  is  expreffed,  the  verb 
fhould  be  in  the  fubjunftive  mode  ;  but 
when  the  faft  is  certain,  or  taken  for  grant 
ed,  the  verb  fhould  be  in  the  indicative. 
He  gives  for  examples  of  the  former,  feveral 
pafTages  from  fcripture  :  "  If  thou  be  the 
fon  of  God."  Matth.  iv.  3.  "  Tho  he^/% 
me,  yet  will  I  truft  in  him."  Job  xiii.  15. 
"  Unlefs  he  wajh  his  flefh."  Lev.  xxii.  6. 
"  No  power  except  it  'were  given  from  a- 
bove*"  John  xix.  u.  "  Whether  it  'were 
I  or  they,  fo  we  preach."  i  Cor.  xv.  1 1. 
"  The  fubjunftive  in  thefe  inftances,"  fays 
the  Bifhop,  "  implies  fomething  contingent 
or  doubtful  ;  the  indicative  would  exprefs 
a  more  abfolute  and  determinate  fenfe." 
To  illaftrate  the  latter  part  of  his  rule, 
he  quotes  a  paflage  from  Atterbury's  Ser 
mons.  cc  Tho  he  were  divinely  infpired, 
and  fpake  therefore  as  the  oracles  of  God, 
with  fupreme  authority  ;  tho  he  were 
endued  with  fupernatural  powers,"  &c. 

That 


244      DISSERTATION 

That  our  Savior  was  divinely  infpired, 
and  endued  with  fupernatural  powers, 
are  pofitions  that  are  here  taken  for  grant 
ed,  as  admitting  not  of  the  leafl  doubt ; 
they  would  therefore  have  been  better  ex- 
preffed  in  the  indicative  mode  j  "  tho  he  was 
divinely  infpired/'  &c.  Even  on  thefe  prin 
ciples,  the  verb  in  the  firft  example  from 
Prieftley,  juft  quoted,  fhould  have  been  in 
the  indicative  ;  for  there  is  no  doubt  that 
reverence,  gratitude,  &c.  are  our  duty  to 
the  Supreme  Being. 

BUT  I  apprehend,  that  however  juft 
Lowth's  diftinflion  between  the  modes, 
may  have  formerly  been,  it  is  not  warrant 
ed  by  the  prefent  idiom  of  the  language. 
Indeed  I  cannot  think  the  rule  juft.  In 
the^?r/?,  fourth  and  fifth  examples  quoted 
by  the  Bifhop,  the  indicative  might  be  fub- 
ftituted  for  the  fubjunftive,  and  the  paff- 
ages  rendered  more  correft,  according  to 
the  prefent  praftice  of  fpeaking  and  writ 
ing.  "  If  thou  art  the  fon  of  God."  "  No 
power  except  it  was  given  from  above." 
<c  Whether  it  was  I,  or  they,  fo  we  preach." 
Every  Englifti  ear  muft  acknowlege  that 
thefe  expreffions  are  more  agreeable  to  our 
prefent  practice,  than  tjiofe  employed  by 

the 


DISSERTATION    IV.      245 

the  tranflators  of  the  Bible,  and  they  con 
vey  an  idea  of  condition  or  doubt,  as  fully 
as  the  other  form.  But  why  did  the  tranf 
lators  deviate  from  the  original  ?  In  the 
Greek,  the  verbs,  in  the  two  ftrft  examples, 
are  in  the  indicative  mode  ;  and  in  the  laft, 
the  verb  is  not  expreffed.  Ei  J^  «  rov  ®w, 
literally,  If  thou  art  the  fon  of  God. 


<roi 


;  literally,  Thou  haft  no  power  (or 
authority)  againft  me,  except  it  was  given 
thee  from  above.  In  the  laft  inftance  the 
verb  is  omitted  ;  E*fc  &  «r«,  &  WMW  •  Wheth 
er  I  or  they.  In  thefe  inftances  therefore  the 
tranflators  of  the  Bible,  and  Bifhop  Lowth 
have  evidently  miftaken  the  true  ftru6lure 
of  the  Englifh  verbs.  The  tranflators 
deviated  from  the  original  Greek,  in 
changing  the  modes  ;  and  the  Bifhop  has 
taken  their  error,  as  the  foundation  of  a 
diftin£lion  which  does  not  exift  in  the  lan 
guage.  The  indicative  mode  is  employed 
to  exprefs  conditional  ideas,  more  frequently 
than  the  fubjun6live,  even  by  the  beft  Eng-- 
Hfh  writers  .  Take  the  following  examples  . 

cc  AND  if  the  fame  accident  is  able  to  re~ 
{lore  them  to  us/'  -  Bolingbroke,  Re- 
flee,  on  Exile. 


246      DISSERTATION    IV. 

"  IF  this  being,  the  immediate  maker  of 
the  univerfe,  has  not  exifted  from  all  eter 
nity,  he  muft  have  derived  his  being  and 

power  from  one  who  has." Prieftley, 

let.  4  to  Phil.  Unb. 

<c  IF  there  is  one,  I  fhall  make  two  in 

the  company."- Merry  Wives  of  Wind-* 

for,  aft  3.  fc.  ii. 

"  IF  thou  loveft  me  then 

Steal  forth  thy  father's  houfe  tomorrow  night,v 

Midfum.  Night's  Dream,  acfc  i.  f,  *, 

«  IF  thou  beeji*  Stephano,  touch  me  and  fpeak  to  me; 
If  thou  beejl  Trinculp,  come  forth." 

Tempeil,  aft  2.  f.  3. 

"  IF  thou  art  any  thing  befides  a  name," 

Cowley's  Requeft. 

«.«  FOR  if  he  lives  that  hath  you  doen  defpight." 

Spenfer's  Fairy  Queen,  book  2.  chap.  j. 

<c IF  any  one  imagines'1- — — Moyle. 

"WHY  did  Caligula  wi(h  that  the 
people  had  but  one  neck,  that  he  might 
iftrike  it  off  at  a  blow,  if  their  welfare 
was  thus  reciprocal." Sidney  on  Gov. 

feft.  5- 

«  IF 

*  IT  muft  be  remembered  that  be  is  the  old  original  fub- 
ftan^ive  verb,  and  belongs  fo  the  indicative.  A.m  and  art  are 
of  later  intrcductign  into  Englifh. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      247 

"  IF  Governments  Are  conftituted."  - 
Sidney. 


"  WELL,  keep  your  own  heart,  if  filencc  is 
Tho  a  woman,  for  once,  I'll  in  ignorance  reit." 
Haley's  Happy  Prefcription. 

"  IF  fhe  has  ftolen  the  color  of  her  rib 
bons  from  another,"  -  Sped.  No.  4. 

"  IF  we  are  rightly  informed/'  -  Same, 
No.  8. 

<c  IF  fhe  is  tall  enough,  fhe  is  wife  e~ 
nough."  -  No.  66. 

"  IF  you  are  in  fuch  hafte,  how  came  you 
to  forget  the  mifcellanies  ?"  -  Swift's 
Letter  to  Mr.  Tooke, 

"  IF  men's  higheft  affurances  are  to  be 
believed."  -  Same. 

SHALL  we  fay  that  the  ufe  of  the  indic 
ative  after  if  in  the  foregoing  exam 
ples  is  improper  or  ungrammatical  ?  By 
no  means.  Yet  the  verbs  exprefs  fome- 
thing  conditional  or  doubtful  ;  and  there 
fore  Lowth's  rule  cannot  be  well  founded. 

LET  the  foregoing  paflages  be  contraft- 
cd  with  the  following. 

"  BUT 


24.8      DISSERTATION    IV. 

"  BUT  if  he  fay  true,  there  is  but  one 
government  in  the  world  that  can  have  any 
thing  of  juftice  in  it."  -  Sidney,  feft.  i* 

<c  IF  he  have  any  knowlege  of  aftual  ex- 
iftence,  he  muft  be  fatisfied."  -  Prieftley, 
let.  8. 

"  BUT  tho  criticifm  be  thus  his  only  de 
clared  aim,  he  will  not  difown,"  6cc.  •  •  - 
Jntrod.  to  Elements  of  Criticifm. 

cc  BUT  if  a  lively  pifture,  even  of  a  fin- 
gle  emotion,  require  an  effort  of  genius, 
how  much  greater  the  effort  to  compofe  a 
paffionate  dialogue,  with  as  many  different 
tones  of  paffion  as  there  are  fpeakers  ?"  - 
Elements  of  Criticifm,  vol.  i.  chap.  16, 


we  muft  alfo  obferve,  that  tho 
THOU  be  long  in  the  firft  part  of  the  verfe, 
it  becomes  fhort  when  repeated  in  the  fec- 
ond."  -  -Sheridan's  Art  of  Reading. 

THE  Scotch  writers,  who  learn  the  Eng- 
lifh  language  grammatically,  are  the  nioft 
particular  in  the  ufeof  this  fubjuncliveform 
of  the  verb  ;  in  confequence  of  which  their 
ftile  generally  appears  ftiff  and  fettered. 
In  all  the  foregoing  examples,  and  in  every 
inftance  where  the  affirmation  refpefts 
prefent  time,  the  indicative  form  is  the 

moft 


DISSERTATION    IV.      249 

moft  correft,  and  the  only  form  that  cor- 
refponds  with  the  aftual  prefent  ftate  of 
the  language.  If  he  fay  s^  if  he  has,  if  he 
requires  y  are  the  true  expreffions  univerfal- 
ly  ufed  in  fpeaking  ;  and  grammars  fhould 
exhibit  and  enforce  this  pradice,  rather 
than  an^end  it. 

THERE  are  few  or  no  Englifh  writers, 
who  feem  to  have  adhered  uniformly  to 
any  rule  in  the  ufe  of  the  verbs  after  the 
conjun6lions.  In  confequence,  either  of 
ignorance  or  inattention,  the  moft  correct 
writers  have  fallen  into  inconftftencies,  e- 
ven  in  the  fame  fentence.  This  will  ap 
pear  by  the  following  examples. 

"  IF  life  and  health  enough  fall  to  my 
fhare,  and  I  am  able  to  finifh.  what  I  med 
itate." -Bolingbroke,  let.  4,  on  Hiftory, 

THE  author  intended  the  verbs,  fall  and 
am>  to  be  in  the  prefent  time  ;  but  this 
would  make  him  write  nonfenfe  ;  for  the 
events  were  future  at  the  time  of  writing. 
The  firft  part  of  the  fentence,  to  make 
fenfe,  muft  be  confidered  as  elliptical,  "  if 
life  and  health  enough  Jhall  or  jlould  fall 
to  my  fhare  ;"  in  the  lall  part  therefore  be 
Ihould  be  fubilituted  for  am,  if  I  foall  he 

able  : 


250      DISSERTATION    IV. 

Me  :  This  would  make  the  whole  fentence 
correft  and  confiftent. 


<c 


WHETHER  our  conduft  be  iafpefted, 
and  we  are  under  a*righteous  government, 

or  under  no  government  at  all." Prieft- 

ley's  Pref.  to  Let.  to  a  Phil.  Unb. 

WHAT  a  confufion  of  modes !  or  rather 
of  tenfes ! 

"  THO  THOU  be  long,  in  the  firft  part  of 
the  verfe,"  fays  Sheridan,  in  the  paflage  juft 
quoted ,  yet  foon  after  ufes  the  indicative 
in  a  phrafe  precifely  fimilar ;  "  And  tho  it 
is  impoffible  to  prolong  the  found  of  this 
word.'*  Can  this  great  critic  give  a  reafon 
for  this  change  ,of  modes  ?  Such  examples 
ferve  to  fhow  at  leaft  the  neceffity  of  ftud- 
ying  our  language  with  more  attention, 
than  even  many  eminent  fcholars  are  will 
ing  to  beflow. 

IT  has  been  remarked  by  Lowth,  and 
many  other  writers  on  this  fubjeft,  that 
"the  verb  itfelf  in  the  prefent,  and  the  aux 
iliary  both  of  the  prefent  and  paft  imper- 
feft  times,  often  carry  with  them  fome- 
what  of  a  future  fenfe."*  Thus,  if  he 

come 

*  Lowing  Introduftion,  p.  39.  Note. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      2jr 

come  tomorrow  ',  if  hejhould  or  would  come  to 
morrow,  carry  fomewbat  of  a  future  fenfe. 
The  writer  fliould  have  gpne  farther,  and 
faid  that  thefe  expreffions  are  in  future 
time  ;  for  they  form  "the  Englifh  future, 
and  belong  to  no  other  tenfe.  This  would 
havq  been  the  truth,  and  have  prevented 
the  numberlefs  errors  which  have  pro 
ceeded  from  his  arranging  them  in  the 
prefent  tenfe  of  the  fubjunftive.  Let  us 
attend  to  the  following  paifages. 

ec  THIS  can  never  happen  till  patriotifm 
flourifo  more  in  Britain/'—  Home's  Sketch 
es,  book  2.  f.  . 


heaven,  I\Q  prove  fo,  when  you 
come  to  him."  —  >—  Two  Gent,  of  Verona, 
a6l  2.  f.  10. 

"  BUT  if  thou  linger  in  my  territories." 
-  Same,  aft  3.  f.  2. 

<c  LEST,  growing  ruinous,  the  building 
fall."  -  Same,  aft  5.  f.  6. 

"  IF  the  fecond  be  pronounced  thus,  the 
verfewill  be  degraded  into  hobbling  profe." 
*.  -  Sheridan's  Art  of  Reading. 

IT  is  needlefs  to  multiply  iimilar  pail- 
ages  ;  the  fame  ufc  of  the  verb,  witliout 

the 


252      DISSERTATION    IV. 

the  perfonal  termination,  occurs  in  almoft 
every  page  of  our  beft  writings,  and  it  is 
perfectly  correft. 

BUT  will  any  perfon  contend  that  the 
verbs  in  thefe  paflages  are  in  the  prefent 
tenfe  ?  The  fenfe  is  entirely  future,  and 
could  not  be  tranflated  into  Latin  or  French, 
without  employing  the  future  tenfe.  The 
expreflions  are  elliptical,  and  cannot  be 
clearly  underftood,  without  inferring  yZ*?// 
Qxftoould  before  the  verbs.  This  pretend 
ed  prefent  tenfe  of  the  fubjunftive  is  there 
fore  the  real  future  of  the  indicative.  To 
confirm  this  remark,  let  us  attend  to  fome 
other  paflages. 

"  THO  he/rfy  me,  yet  will  I  truft  in  him/' 

<c  Unlefs  he  ivafh  his  flefh,  he  (hall  not 
eat  of  the  holy  things." 

IN  the  original  Hebrew  thefe  verbs  are 
in  the  future  tenfe  ;  and  fo  are  moft  fimi- 
lar  expreflions.* 

MATTH. 

*  «  THE  prefent  tenfe  in  Englifh  hath  often  ihefcnfe  of  the 
future  ;  as  when  do  you  go  out  of  town  ?  I  go  tomorrow  :  that 
is,  when  will  you,  (hall  you  go  ?  I  (hall  go.  If  you  do  well, 
that  is,  fliall  do  well,  you  will  be  rewarded  :  Asfoon  as,  or 
token  you  ccmc  there  ;  that  is,  fliall  come,  turn  on  your  right 
hand :  With  thefe  forms  of  fpe'aking,  the  verb  is  always 

placed 


DISSERTATION    IV.      253 

MATTH.  vii.  10.  —  Or  if  he  ajk  a  filh,  will 
he  give  him  a  ferpent  ?  K**  *M  ^w 


ROM.  xiv.   15.  —  But  if  thy  brother  be 
grieved  with  thy  meat.     E*  y<*%  <&<* 


<rou 


LUKE  xvii.  3.  —  If  thy  brother  trefpafs  a- 
gainft  thee.  Eax  ^y.^^  o  g&xper  o-ou.  4, 
And  feven  times  in  a  day  *«r«  again  to  thee. 


LUKE  xvi.  28.  —  Left  they  alfo  r00w  into 
this  place  of  torment.     Mu  xai  «ulw  fA9wa-;y  «*r 

TOuloV  T0*>  T07TOJ>  T^f  j3ct<TaVOU** 

Is 

placed  in  the  future  in  Latin,  Greek  and  Hebrew."—— 
Bayley's  Intro,  to  Lan.  Lit.  and  Phil.  99. 

THIS  critical  writer  has  explained  this  mode  of  fpeaking 
with  accuracy  ;  but  it  would  be  more  correct  to  call  this 
form  of  the  verb,  an  elliptical  future,  than  to  fay,  the  prefcnt 
tenje  has  the  fcnfe  of  the  future. 

*  So  in  the  law  ftile.  <f  If  a  man  die  inteftate  ;"  "  if  a 
man  die  feifed  of  an  eftate  in  fee  ;"  "  if  Titius  enfcofGams," 
&c.  are  future  ;  and  in  mod  fuch  phrafes  ufed  in  tranila* 
tions  from  the  Latin  and  French,  the  verbs  in  the  original 
are  future.  But  in  law  the  fame  form  is  ufed  in  the  prefent 
very  frequently,  agreeable  to  the  ancient  prattice.  The 
reafon  may  be,  the  convenience  and  riccemty  of  copying 
words  and  phrafes  with  great  exaftnefs.  But  Blackilone, 
the  mafr  accurate  and  elegant  law  writer,ufes  the  other  form? 
"  if  a  man  has  heirs  ;"  "  if  a  good  or  valuable  consideration 
appears  ;"  and  too  often,  when  the  fenfe  requires  the  future. 
He  generally  gives  be  its  fubjunftive  form,  as  it  is  called, 
and  mofl  other  verbs  the  indicative, 


254      DISSSRTATION    IV, 

Is  not  the  fenfe  of  the  foregoing  verbs 
future  ?  Are  not  the  verbs  in  the  original, 
either  in  the  future  tenfe,  or  in  the  indefi 
nite  tenfes,  which,  in  the  fubjunftive  mode, 
ufually  have  the  fenfe  of  the  future,  and 
perhaps  never  the  fenfe  of  the  prefent  ? 
Why  then  fhould  we  confider  the  Englifh 
verbs  as  in  the  prefent  time  ?  Either  the 
tranilators  made  a  miftake,  and  placed  the 
verbs  in  a  wrong  tenfe  -,  or  Lowth  and  his 
followers  have  miftaken  the  tenfe,  and'call- 
ed  that  prefent  which  is  really  future. 

THAT  the  fault  is,  in  foine  meafure,  to  be 
afcribed  to  the  translators,  is  evident  from 
their  ufmg  the  fame  form  of  the  verb,  af^ 
ter  a  conjunction,  when  the  original  Greek 
is  in  the  prefent  of  the  indicative. 

i  COR.  xvi.  22.  —  If  any  man  love  not 
the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  let  him  be,  &c. 

lii  rjf  ou  pjAfi  roy  Kupov  Irjirouv  X/Jitr/oi',  n/w,  &C. 


i  COR.  xiv.  37.—  If  any  man  think  him- 

felf  a   prophet.      E*   &    T»r  ^ox^t  iirpef»ilur  «i/ai. 

38.  —  If  any  man  be  ignorant,  let  him  be 
inorant  ftill.     E*  ^  rt 


IN  thefe  inftances,  the  verbs  exprefs  con 
ditional  fafts  in  the  prefent  time.  In  the 
original  they  are  in  the  indicative  prefent  ; 

and 


DISSERTATION    IV.       255 

and  on  what  authority  did  the  tranflators 
introduce  a  different  mode  in  Englifh  ? 
Can  they  be  juftified  by  the  idioms  of  the 
language  at  the  time  when  they  lived  ? 
Was  the  fubjunftive  always  ufed  after  a 
conjunction  ?  By  no  means  :  Their  own 
tranflation  of  other  paflages  proves  the 
contrary. 

i  COR.  xv.  13.  —  And  if  their  is  no  ref- 
urre6lion  of  the  dead.     E» 


HERE  is  the  prefent  tenfe  of  the  indica 
tive  ufed,  where  the  fa6l  mentioned  is  fup- 
pofed,  by  the  argument,  to  be  at  leail 
doubtful.  In  other  places  the  prefent  time 
of  the  fame  mode  is  ufed,  where  the  future 
would  have  been  more  accurate. 

PROV.  ii.  3,  4.  —  "  Yea  if  thou  crieft  after 
knowlege,  and  liftefl  up  thy  voice  for  un~ 
derftanding  ;  ifthoufeeke/i  for  her  as  for  hid 
treafures,  then  fhaltthou  underftand,"  &c. 

WHAT  conclufion  fhall  we  draw  from 
this  ftate  of  fafts  ?  This  at  leaft  may  be 
faid  with  fafety,  either  that  the  Englifh 
modes  and  tenfes  have  not  been  afcertain- 
ed  and  underftood,  or  that  the  beft  of  our 
writers  have  been  extremely  negligent. 

AFTEK 


256      DISSERTATION    IV. 

AFTER  an  attentive  and  accurate  examin* 
ation  of  this  fubjeft,  I  believe  I  may  venture 
to  aflert,  that  nine  times  out  of  ten,  when 
the  pretended  fubjunftive  form  of  the  verb 
is  ufed  after  a  conjunction,  either  in  the  vul 
gar  tranflation  of  the  Bible,  or  in  our  belt 
profane  authors,  the  fenfe  is  aftually  fu 
ture,  and  to  render  the  fentences  complete, 
it  would  be  necefTary  to  infertyZ*?//  orjhould* 
This  will  be  more  obvious  by  attending 
to  the  Latin  tranflation  of  the  New  Tefta- 
ment,  where  the  future  is  almoft  always 
employed  to  exprefs  the  Greek  future  and 
aorifts.  Igitur  Jl  munus  tuum  attuleris  ad 
alt  are — If  thou  bring  thy  gift  to  the  altar  ; 
et  illtc  memineris — and  there  remembereft  ; 
(what  confufion  of  modes.)  If  his  fon 
tifk  bread — Sijilius  ejus  petizntpanem.  And 
if  the  houfe  be  worthy — E>tfi  quidem  fuerit 
domus  digna  ;  and  fo  throughout  the  whole 
New  Teftament. 

WILL  any  perfon  pretend  to  fay  that  the 
verbs  bring*  ajk  and  be*  in  the  foregoing 
fages,  are  prefent  time  ;  or  that  remem- 
ereft  is  not  bad  Englifh  ?  The  elliptical 
future,  If  thou  be,  if  he  ajky  &c.  is  correft 
Englifh,  but  fhould  by  no  means  be  con 
founded 

*  IN  Tome  inflances,  the  time  is  prefent,  and  the  ellipfis 
may  be  fupplied  by  may  or  fame  other  auxiliary. 


DISSERTATION     IV.       257 

founded  with  the  prefent  tenfe,  which,  in 
Englifh,  has  but  bne  form. 

I  DO  not  deny  that  good  authors  have 
ufed  this  form,  after  conjunctions,  in  the 
prefent  time  ;  but  I  deny  that  the  genius 
of  the  language  requires  it,  that  it  is  agree 
able  to  the  ancient  or  modern  elegant  lan 
guages,  and  that  it  has  been  or  is  now  the 
general  praftice, 

WITH  refpecl  to  the  ancient  pra£tice, 
examples  fufficient  have  been  already  pro 
duced,  to  (how  that  authors  have  confider- 
ed  the  prefent  of  the  indicative,  after  con- 
jun6lions,  denoting  uncertainty  or  doubt, 
as  at  leaft  correft  ;  and  the  prefent  prac 
tice  in  fpeaking  is  wholly  on  this  fide  of 
the  argument. 

WITH  refpeft  to  the  Roman  and  Greek 
languages,  I  believe  examples  enough  may 
be  brought  to  prove,  that  the  fubjunAive 
mode  after  the  conditional  conjunctions  or 
adverbs,  was  not  generally  ufed,  except 
when  the  idea  was  fuch  as  we  fhould  ex- 
prefs  by  may^  might,  JJwuld,  let,  or  fome  oth 
er  auxiliary  before  the  verb.  "  Quid  eft 
autem,  quod  deos  vener 'emur  propter  admi- 
rationem  ejus  naturae,  in  qua  egregium  ni- 
R  hil 


258      DISSERTATION    IV. 

hil  videmus  ?"  "  Ut,  quos  ratio  non  pof- 
fet,  eos  ad  officium  religio  duceret?  —  Cic 
ero,  De  nat  Deorum,  1.  i.  42.  To  render 
veneremur  and  duceret  into  Englifh,  jhould 
may  be  prefixed  to  adorey  and  might  to 
lead. 

AT  any  rate,  the  conditional  conjunc 
tions  do  not  all,  nor  generally  require  the 
fubjunftive  mode  :  "  Quae,  Ji  mundus  eft 
Deus,  quoniam  mundi  partes  funt,  Dei 
membra  parim  ardentia,  partim  refrigera- 
ta  dicenda  funt."—  Ibm.  1.  i.  10.  "  Si  Di 
poffunt  efle  fine  fenfu,"  &c.  The  indicative 
after  this  conjunction  occurs  frequently  in 
the  beft  Roman  authors. 

IN  Greek  the  cafe  is  nearly  the  fame. 
Several  inftances  of  the  indicative  after  the 
conditional  conjunfticn  «  (if)  have  already 
been  quoted  from  fcripture  ;  and  fimilar 
inftances  without  number  may  be  produc 
ed  from  profane  writers. 


tri^TTiw  £tr      f/JC-ar,  xat  aptx,  ptv 
or*  ft   Ti  7T£i(TctTai  M^^ot,  ftr  ITf^crar  TO 

^   KIT  t  iv  TrXziov  rp^Tfu/xa  i"—  -—  Xenoph.  de  Cyri. 
Inft.  1.  2.  p.  80.  Lond.  Ed. 

HERE  the  verb  £&"  is  in  theprefent  tenfe 
of  the  indicative,  after  a  conjunftion  de 

noting 


DISSERTATION     IV.       259 

noting  condition  or  doubt  ;  "  if  the  affair 
it  fo — if  fuch  is  the  true  ftate  of  affairs, 
Cyrus,  what  better  method  can  be  taken 
(fupoO  than  to  fend  to  the  Perfians,  and  in 
form  them  that  if  any  accident  happen  to 
the  Medes  (fo  we  fhould  render  Trao-ofc, 
which  is  in  the  future)  calamity  will  fall 
upon  the  Perfians  alfo,  and  let  us  afk  for 
a  greater  force." 

IN  French,  the  conditional  conjunftions 
do  not  require  the  fubjunftive  mode.  "  Si 
ma  prediction  eft  faufie,  vous  ferez  libre  de 
nous  immoler  dans  trois  jours/' — Telem- 
aque,  liv.  i.  cc  S'il  eft  vrai  quevous  aimi- 
ez  la  juftice." — Liv.  4.  If  my  prediftion 
is  falfe — if  it  is  true — are  correft  modes  of 
'  fpeaking  in  French.  No  argument  there 
fore  in  favor  of  the  ufe  of  the  Englifh  fub- 
jun6tive,  can  be  drawn  from  the  analogy  of 
other  languages, 

BUT  this  fubjunftive  form  is  not  agree 
able  to  the  ftrufture  of  the  language.  It 
has  been  demonstrated  that  our  conjunc 
tions  are  moftly  old  Saxon  verbs  in  the 
imperative  mode.  Let  us  refolvc  fome 
fentences  where  the  fubjunftive  form  is 
ufed  5  for  example,  the  paffages  before 
quoted. 

R2  "IF 


260      DISSERTATION    IV. 

cc  IF  he  have  any  knowlege  of  aftual  ex- 

iftence,  he  muft  be  fatisfied." Prieftley's 

Letters. 

RESOLVED—"  He  have  any  knowlege  of 
aftual  exiftence,  (if)  give  that,  he  muft  be 
fatisfied."  Is  this  Englilh  ? 

"  IF  thou  be  the  fon  of  God,  command 

that   thefe  ftones   be  made    bread." 

Matth.  iv  .3. 

RESOLVED — "  Thou  be  the  fon  God? 
give  that,  command,"  &c. 

"  THO  he  flay  me,  yet  will  I  truft  in 
him." 

RESOLVED — cc  He  flay  me,  grant  it,  yet 
will  I  truft  in  him." 

This  is  the  literal  conftru6tion  of  thofe 
fentences  ^  the  two  firft  are  prefent  time, 
the  laft,  which  is  future,  is  merely  elliptical, 

IF  therefore,  I  be^  he  have,  are  good  Eng- 
lifh  in  the  prefent  tenfe  of  the  indicative, 
the  foregoing  are  correft  expreflions  5  if 
not,  they  are  incorreft ;  for  every  fuch  con 
ditional  fentence  is  relblvable  into  two  or 
more  declaratory  phrafes.  Let  us  fubfti- 
tute  the  Latin  derivative,  which  precifely 

anfwers 


DISSERTATION    IV.      -61 

anlwers  to  if,  viz.  fuppofe  ;  thus,  in  place 
of  "if  thou  be  the  fon  of  God,"  write, 
"fuppofe  thou  be  the  fon  of  God,"  does  not 
every  ear  acknowlege  the  impropriety  ? 
The  only  difference  between  the  two  ex- 
preffions  is  this  ;  if  is  a  Saxon  verb  in  the 
imperative  mode,  and  fuppofe^  a  Latin  one 
in  the  fame  mode. 

WITH  reipeft  to  He,  it  may  be  faid  very 
juftly,  that  it  was  anciently  ufed  after  the 
conjunctions  in  almoft  all  cafes.  But  it 
muft  be  obferved  alfo,  it  was  ufed  without 
the  conjunctions.  Be,  from  the  Saxon  be- 
on,  is  the  true  radical  verb,  ftill  preferved 
in  the  German,  Ich  bi?2,  I  be,  du  hi  ft,  thou 
beeft,  in  tlie  indicative.  The  old  Englifh 
writers  employed  be  in  the  fame  mode  and 
tenfe. 

<c  O,  THERE  be  players  that  I  have  feen 
play." -Shakefp.  Hamlet  to  the  Players. 

<c  THEY  that  be  drunken,  are  drunken  in 
the  night." 1  Theff.  v.  7. 

<c  As  we  be  flanderoufly  reported." 

Rom.  iii.  8. 

THE  common  people  in  New  England 
ftill  employ  be  in  the  prefent  tenfe  of  the  in- 
R  3  dkative. 


262      DISSERTATION    IV. 

dicative,  except  in  the  third  perfon.  They 
almoft  imiverfally  fay,  I  be,  we  be,  you  be, 
and  they  be.  While  be  remained  the  proper 
fubftantive  verb  in  the  indicative,  it  was 
very  corre6lly  employed  after  the  conjunc 
tions,  If  he  be,  tho  be  be,  but  when  am,  are, 
art  and  is  were  fubftituted  in  the  indica 
tive,  they  fhould  likewife  have  been  em 
ployed  in  the  fubjun£live  ;  for  the  latter  is 
refolvable  into  the  former. 

FROM  the  fa£ls  produced,  and  the  re 
marks  made,  we  may  draw  the  following 
conclufions  ;  that  the  diftinftion  made  by 
grammarians  between  the  prefent  tenfe  of 
the  indicative  and  fubjunffive  mode  in 
Englifh,  is  not  well  founded  -,  that  it  is  not 
warranted  by  the  conftru6lion  of  the  lan 
guage,  nor  by  the  analogy  of  other  lan 
guages  ;  that  the  expreffions  commonly 
fuppofed  to  be  in  the  prefent  tenfe  of  the 
fubjunclive,  are  moftly  in  fa£l  an  elliptical 
form  of  the  future  in  the  indicative,  and 
that  the  prefent  translation  of  the  Bible 
cannot  be  vindicated  on  any  other  fuppo- 
fition ;  that  the  prefent  practice,  both  in 
fpeaking  and  writing,  is  generally  in  favor 
of  the  indicative  after  the  conjunftions  ; 
and  confequently,  that  the  arrangement  of 
the  verbs  by  Lowth  apd  his  followers,  is 

calculated 


DISSERTATION    IV.       263 

calculated  to  lead  both  foreigners  and  na 
tives  into  error. 

I  HAVE  been  more  particular  upon  this 
article,  becaufe  the  Scotch  writers,  many 
of  whom  ftand  among  the  firft  authors  of 
the  Britifh  nation,  follow  the  ufual  gram 
matical  divifion  of  verbs,  and  thus  write  a 
flile  not  conformed  to  the  prefent  praftice 
of  fpeaking. 

IN  the  life  of  what  is  called  the  imperfect 
tenfe,  after  the  conjunftions,  there  is  fome- 
thing  peculiar,  which  has  not  yet  been  fuf- 
ficiently  explained.  On  examination  it 
will  probably  be  found  that  cuftom  has 
eftablifhed  one  fingular  diftinftion  in  the 
fenfe  of  verbs  in  different  tenfes,  a  knowl- 
ege  of  which  is  neceflary  to  enable  us  to 
fpeak  and  write  with  precifion.  This  dif- 
tinftion  will  readily  be  underftood  by  a 
few  examples, 

A  SERVANT  calls  on  me  for  a  book, 
which  his  mafter  would  borrow.  If  I  am 
uncertain  whether  I  have  that  book  or  not, 
I  reply  in  this  manner  ;  "  If  the  book  is  in 
my  library,  or  if  I  have  the  book,  your 
mailer  fhall  be  welcome  to  the  ufe  of  it." 

BUT 


364      DISSERTATION    IV. 

BUT  if  I  am  certain  I  do  not  poffefs  the 
book,  the  reply  is  different  ;  "  I  have  not 
the  book  you  mention  ;  if  I  had,  it  fhould 
be  at  your  mailer's  iervice." 

BOTH  thefe  forms  of  fpeaking  are  cor- 
re<5l  ;  but  the  queilion  is,  what  is  the  dif 
ference  ?  It  cannot  be  in  time  ;  for  both 
refer  to  the  fame.  The  ideas  both  refpe£t 
prefent  time ;  "  If  I  have  it  now,  it  flail  be 
at  your  mailer's  fervice"— ?c  If  I  had  it  now, 
\tjhould  be."  The  diilin6lion  in  the  mean 
ing  is  univerfally  underiloqd,  and  is  fimply 
this  ;  the  firil  expreffes  uncertainty  ;  the 
lail  implies  certainty,  but  in  a  peculiar 
manner  $  for  an  affirmative  fentence  im 
plies  a  pofitive  negation  ;  and  a  negative 
fentence  implies  a  pofitive  affirmation* 
Thus,  'if  I  had  the  book,  implies  a  pofitive 
denial  of  having  it ;  //  I  had  not  the  book* 
implies  that  J  have  it  :  And  both  fpeak  of 
poileffing  or  not  poifeffing  it  at  this  prefent 
time. 

THE  fame  diilinftion  runs  thro  all  the 
verbs  in  the  language.  A  man,  ihut  up  in 
an  interior  apartment,  would  fay  to  his 
friend,  "  if  it  rains  you  cannot  go  home/' 
This  would  denote  the  fpeaker's  uncertain 
ty.  But  on  corning  to  the  door  and  afcer- 
taining  the  faCl,  he  would  fay,  cc  if  it  rain 
ed 


DISSERTATION    IV.      265 

ed,  you  fhould  not  go  5"  or,  "  if  it  did  not 
rain,  you  might  go/'  Can  thefe  verbs  be 
in  faft  time  ?  By  no  means  ;  if  it  did  not 
rain  now,  you  could  go,  is  prefent,  for  the 
prefent  exiftence  of  the  faft  prevents  the 
man  from  going. 

THESE  forms  of  fpeech  are  eftablifhed 
by  unanimous  confent  in  practice. 

"  IT  remaineth  that  they  who  have 
wives,  be  as  tho  they  had  none,  and  they 
that  weep,  as  tho  they  wept  not ;  and  they 
that  rejoice,  as  tho  they  rejoiced  not ;  and 
they  that  buy,  as  tho  they  pojfejjed  not." 
• 1  Cor.  vii.  29,  30.* 


cc 


NAY,  and  the  villains  march  wide  be 
twixt  the  legs,  as  if  they  bad  gyves  on." — 
i  Henry  IV. 

"  WE  have  not  thefe  antiquities  ;  and  if 
we  /Wthem,  they  would  add  to  our  uncer 
tainty. Bolingbroke  on  Hift.  let.  3. 

cc  WHEREAS,  had  I  (if  I  had)  ftill  the 
fame  woods  to  range  in,  which  I  once  had^ 

when 

*  IN  the  original,  the  participle  of  the  prefent  time  is  em 
ployed  :  tj/a  xat  f^o&f  yuv«t>car,  wr  f*»)  sj^oflir  ">  and  fo 
in  the  other  inftances.  The  Greek  is  correct  ;  "  thofc  two* 
ing  wives  ag  not  having  them.'*  The  tranflation  is  agreeable 
enough  to  the  Engliih  idiom  ;  but  the  verbs  represent  the 
prefent  time, 


266      DISSERTATION    IV. 

when  I  was  a  fox  hunter,  I  fhould  not  re- 

fign  my  manhood  for  a  maintenance." 

Sped.  No.  14. 

"  I  confefs  I  have  not  great  tafte  for  po 
etry  ;  but  if  I  had,  I  am  apt  to  believe  I 

ihould  read  none  but  Mr.  Pope's."* 

Shenftone  on  Men  and  Manners. 

WHATEVER  thefe  verbs  may  be  in  de 
claratory  phrafes,  yet  after  the  conditional 
conjunctions  //"and  tho,  they  often  exprefs 
prefent  ideas,  as  in  the  foregoing  examples. 
In  fuch  cafes,  this  form  of  the  verb  may 
be  denominated  the  hypothetical  prefent 
tenfe.  This  would  diftinguifh  it  from  the 
fame  form,  when  it  exprefles  uncertainty 
in  the  pall  time  ;  for  this  circumftance 
mult  not  be  pafTed  without  notice.  Thus, 

"If 

*  A  SIMILAR  ufe  of  the  verb  occurs  after  wijh;  "  /  wifk 
I  had  my  eftate  now  in  poffeffion  ;"  this  would  be  expreffed 
in  Latin.  Utinam  me  kabere,  ufmg  the  prefent  of  the  infin 
itive,  or  Utinam  ut  habe.rem  ;  but  this  Imperfect  tenfe  of  the 
Subju&ive,  both  in  Latin  and  French,  is  ufed  to  convey  the 
lame  ideas  as  Englifh  verbs  after  if;  if  I  had,  fi  habtrcm,  ft 
jaurois.  and  whatever  may  be  the  name  annexed  to  this 
form  of  the  verb,  it  cannot,  in  the  foregoing  fenfe,  have  any 
reference  to  pad  time. 

THE  common  phrafes,  /  had  rather,  he,  had  better  t  are  faid 
to  be  a  corruption  of  /  would  rather,  he  would  better)  rapidly 
pronounced,  I'd  rather.  I  am  not  fatisfied  that  this  is  a  juil 
account  of  their  origin  ;  would  will  not  fupply  the  place  of 
had  \  n  all  cafes.  Ac  any  rate,  the  phrafes  have  become  good 


EngUih. 


DISSERTATION    IV.      267 

"  If  he  had  letters  by  the  laft  mail/'  de 
notes  the  fpeaker's  uncertainty  as  to  a  paft 
faft  or  event.  But,  "  if  be  had  a  book,  he 
would  lend  it,"  denotes  a  prefent  certainty 
that  he  has  it  not.  The  times  referred  to 
are  wholly  diftinft. 

As  the  pra6lice  of  all  writers  and  good 
fpeakers,  and  even  of  the  vulgar,  is  nearly 
uniform  in  the  diftinftion  here  mentioned, 
it  is  needlefs  to  produce  more  examples  for 
illuftration.  One  verb  however  deferves  a 
feparate  confideration  ;  which  is  be.  In 
the  uie  of  this  verb  in  the  hypothetical 
fenfe,  there  is  a  difference  between  good 
authors  and  common  parlance  ;  the  firft 
write  were,  but  moft  people  in  converfa- 
tion  fay,  was.  Thus, 

"  EVERY  rich  man  has  ufually  fome  fly 
way  of  jelling,  which  would  make  no  great 
figure,  were  he  not  rich." Spe£l.  No.  2. 

C{  HE  will  often  argue,  that  if  this  part 
of  our  trade  were  well  cultivated,  we  fhould 
gain  from  one  nation/'  &c.- Same. 

cc  WERE  I  (if  I  were)  a  father,  I  fhould 
take  a  particular  care  to  prefcrve  rny  chil 
dren  from  thele  little  horrors  of  imagina 
tion." came.  No.  12. 

"NOR 


268      DISSERTATION    IV. 

**  NOR  think,  tho  men  were  none, 
That  heaven  would  want  fpe&ators,  God  want  praife.'1 

Milton,  P.  L. 

«  WHAT  then  he  zaasy  oh,  were,  your  Neftor  now.'* 

Pope,  Iliad,  b.  7.  189. 

<c  YES,  if  the  nature  of  a  clock  were  to 
fpeak,  not  ftrike." Ben  Johnfon. 

"  WHERE  the  poor  knave  erroneoufly  believes, 
If  he  were  rich,  he  would  build  churches,  or 
Do  fuch  mad  things.'' i  Same. 

WERE,  in  thefe  examples,  is  the  fame  hy 
pothetical  prefent  tenfe  juft  defcribed,  hav 
ing  not  the  leaft  reference  to  the  paft.* 
But  in  converfation,  we  generally  hear  was  ^ 
"  if  I  was  in  his  place  j"  "  if  he  was  here 
now,"  &c.  and  I  obferve  that  modern  writ 
ers  are  copying  the  general  pra&ice. 

"  If  I  was  not  afraid  of  being  thought  to 
refine  too  much." — Boling.  Refl.  on  Exile, 

BOTH 

*  THE  following  tranflation  of  a  paffage  in  Cicero  is  di- 
reftly  in  point.  «  Vivo  tamen  in  ea  ambitione  et  labore 

tanquam  id,  quod  non  poftulo,  expccltm," Cicero  ad 

Quintum.  2.   15. 

"  I  LIVE  ftill  in  fuch  a  courfe  of  ambition  and  fatigue,  as 
if  /  we  re  cxpe&ing  what  I  do  not  really  defire." ^-Middle- 
ton,  Life  of  Cicero,  vol.  2.  p.  97. 

HERE  tanquam  expettem  are  rendered  very  juflly,  "  as  if 
I  were  expcftmg ;"  now,  in  prefent  time,  agreeable  to  the 
original.  The  words  carry  a  negative  :  if  I  were  expelling, 
implying,  that  I  do  notexpett* 


DISSERTATION    IV.      269 

BOTH  thefe  forms  have  fuch  authorities 
to  fupport  them,  that  neither  can  be  con- 
fidered  as  wholly  incorrect ;  they  are  both 
Englifh.  But  cuftom  will  eventually  ef- 
tablifh  the  latter,  was,  as  the  hypothetical 
form  of  the  fubftantive  verb.  It  is  now 
almoft  univerfally  ufed,  except  in  books  j 
and  the  tide  of  general  praftice  is  irrefift- 
ible. 

THE  following  examples  will  illuftrate 
what  has  been  advanced. 

Prefent  time.     Affirmative. 

IF  he  has  or  is — denotes  uncertainty. 
If  he  had  or  'were  or  was — denote  certainty 
that  he  has  not,  or  is  not. 

Negative. 

IF  he  has  not  or  is  not — uncertainty. 
If  he  had  not,  were  not  or  'was  not — cer 
tainty  that  he  has  or  is. 

Paft  time.     Affirm. 

IF  he  had  or  was  yefterday — uncertainty. 
If  he  had  have,*  or  had  been  yefterday — • 
certainty  that  he  had  not,  or  was  not. 

Negative. 

*  THIS  tenfe  is  not  admitted  to  be  good  Englifh  ;  yet  is 
€*ften  ufed  in  fpeaking  ;  the  have  being  contracted  or  cor 
rupted  into  a^  had  a  written^  if  he 


270      DISSERTATION    IV, 

Negative. 

IF   he  had  or  'was    not — uncertainty.. 
If  he  had  not  have,  or  had  not  been — cer-* 
tainty  that  he  had  or  was.* 

I  CANNOT  clofe  my  remarks  on  the  tenfes 
of  the  Englifh  verb,  without  noticing  a 
common  error,  which  muft  have  fprung 
from  inattention,  and  is  perhaps  too  gen 
eral  now  to  admit  of  correction.  It  is  the 
ufe  of  the  paft  tenfe  after  another  verb  or 
thaty  when  the  fenfe  requires  a  change  of 
tenfes.  Thus, 

"  SUPPOSE  I  were  to  fay,  that  to  every 
art  there  was  a  fyftem  of  fuch  various  and 
well  approved  principles." Harris. 

THE  firft  part  of  the  fentence  is  hypo 
thetical,  fuppofe  I  were  to  fay  -,  but  the  laft 
becomes  declaratory  under  the  fuppofition, 
and  therefore  the  form  of  the  verb  fhould 
be  changed  to  the  prefent,  indicative,  that 
to  every  art  there  is  afyjlem  :  For  it  muft 
be  remarked  that  when  the  Englifh  fpeak 
of  general  exiftence,  they  ufe  the  prefent 

time  ; 

*  WE  have  derived  our  fubftantive  verb  from  two  rad 
ical  verbs  ;  beon,  whence  ccme  the  Englifh  be,  and  the  Ger 
man  bi/i ;  and  tueortkan,  to  be  or  become^  fieri ;  from  which 
probably  the  Danes  have  their  varer,  and  the  Englifh 
-  their  were. 


DISSERTATION    IV.       271 

time  ;  as,  truth  is  great  above  all  things ; 
the  fcriptures  are  a  rule  of  faith  -,  the  heav 
ens  difplay  the  glory  of  the  Lord.  The 
paft  or  the  future,  in  fuch  cafes,  would  be 
highly  improper.  Hence  the  abfurdity  of 
the  pafiage  juft  quoted  ;  the  fuppofition  is 
that  every  art  has  (generally — at  all  times) 
a  fyftem  of  principles. 

"  IF  the  taxes  laid  by  government  'were 
the  only  ones  we  had  to  pay." 

THE  author's  meaning  is,  cc  the  only 
taxes  we  have  to  pay  ;"  and  he  was  prob 
ably  led  into  the  miftake  by  not  under- 
ftanding  the  preceding  hypothetical  verb, 
were,  which  actually  fpeaks  of  the  prefent 
time  conditionally. 

THE  error  will  be  more  ftriking  in  the 
following  paflfages. 

"  IF  an  atheift  would  well  confider  the 
arguments  in  this  book,  he  would  confefs 
there  was  a  God."  .  4 

THERE  was  a  God  !  And  why  not  con 
fefs  that  there  is  a  God  ?  The  writer  did  not   * 
confider  that  the  firft  part  of  the  fentencc  * 
is  conditional^  and  that  the  laft  ought  to 
be  declaratory  of  a  faft  always  exifting. 

"Two 


272      DISSERTATION    IV. 

"  Two  young  men  have  made  a  difcov- 

ery  that  there  was  a  God." Swift's  Arg, 

againft  Abolifhing  Christianity. 

A  CURIOUS  difcovery  indeed  !  Were  the 
Dean  flill  alive,  he  might  find  there  is  a 
great  inaccuracy  in  that  paflage  of  his 
works. 

"YET  were  we  to  ufe  the  fame  word, 
,  where  the  figure  iva$  manifeft,  we  fhould 

ufe  the    prepofition  from" Prieftley, 

Gram<  p.  158. 

HERE  is  the  fame  error,  and  the  author 
may  live  to  corred  it. 

BUT  of  all  this  clafs  of  miftakes,  the  fol 
lowing  is  the  moft  palpable. 

cc  I  AM  determined  to  live,  as  if  there 

'was  a  future  life."- Hammon,   quoted 

by  Price  and  Prieftley. 

HAMMON  is  an  atheift,  and  it  would 
require  the  fame  abilities  to  reconcile  the 
two  words  'was  future^  as  to  reconcile  his 
principles  with  the  common  fenfe  of  man 
kind* 

THE 

*  THE  great  fource  of  thefe  errors  is  this :  Grammarians 
have  eonfidered  that  as  a  conjunftion,  and  fuppofed  that 

*c  conjun&iorus 


IV.      273 

THE  following  pa&age,  from  Gregory's 
Comparative  View  of  the  State  and  Faculties 
of  Man 5  is  remarkable  for  this  error. 

cc  MEN  have  been  taught  that  they  did 
(do)  God  acceptable  fervice,  by  abftracting 
themfelves  from  all  the  duties  they  owed 
(owe)  to  fociety ;  and  by  infli6ting  on 
themfelves  the  fevertft  tortures  which  na 
ture  can  fupport.  They  have  been  taught 
that  it  'was  (is)  their  duty/'  &c. 

"  AND  yet  one  would  think  that  this  was 
the  principal  ufe  of  the  ftudy  of  hiftory." 
— — Bolingbroke  on  Hift.  letter  3. 

A  SIMILAR  fault  occurs  in  one  of  Mrs. 
Thale's  letters  to  Dr.  Johnfon,  Aug.  9, 1 7754 

" — YET 

«  conjunctions  couple  like  cafes  and  modes  ;"  a  Latin  rule 
that  does  hot  always  hold  in  Englifh.  But  Mr.  Home 
Tooke  has  clearly  proved  the  word  that  to  be  always  a  rel 
ative  pronoun  :  It  always  relates  to  a  word  or  fentence  j 
and  the  reafon  why  grammarians  have  called  it  a  conjunc 
tion,  may  be  this  ;  they  could  not  find  any  word  to  govern 
it  as  a  relative,  and  therefore  did  not  know  what  to  do  with 
it.  But  it  is  in  facl:  a  relative  word,  thus,  "  two  men  have 
made  a  difcovery  ;"  this  is- one  affertion.  What  difcovery  # 
"  that  or  this  is  the  difcovery  *,"  the  word  that  carrying  the- 
force  of  a  complete  affirmation  ;  "  there  was  a  God,"  Here 
we  fee  the  abfurdity  of  Swift's  declaration  and  the  common 
notions  of  a  fabjuncHve  mode.  There  is  no  fubjunftive  ; 
in  ftri chiefs  of  fpeech,  ail  fentences  are  refolvable  into  dif- 
tinft  declaratory  phrafes.  *<  There  is  a  God  ;"  "  two  young 
men  have,  difcovered  that  ;"  fo  the  fentence  fliould  be  writ 
ten  to  ihow  the,  true  conftruclion. 

s 


274      DISSERTATION    IV. 

cc — YET  I  have  always,  found  the  beft 
fupplement  for  talk  was  writing." 

So  in  Blackftone's  Commentaries,  book 
i.  chap.  7. 

"  IT  was  obferved  in  a  former  chap 
ter,  that  one  of  the  principal  bulwarks  of 
civil  liberty,  or,  in  other  words,  of  the 
Britifh  conflitution,  was  the  limitation  of 
the  king's  prerogative." 

THE  obfervation  had  been  made  in  time 
paft,  but  refpefiting  a  faft  that  exifts  now, 
and  at  all  times  while  the  Britifh  conflitu 
tion  exifts.  The  fentence  therefore  fhould 
run  thus  j  "  it  was  obferved  that  one  prin 
cipal  bulwark  of  civil  liberty,  is  the  limit 
ation  of  the  king's  prerogative." 

No  fault  is  more  common  ;  we  every 
day  hear  fuch  expreffions  as  thefe  ;  "  If  I 
thought  it  was  fo  ;"  "  fuppofe  I  fhould  fay 
fhe  was  handfome  $"  "  I  did  not  think  it 
was  fo  late,"  &c.  Was>  in  the  firft  and  laft 
examples,  fhould  be  the  infinitive,  to  be ; 
and  in  the  fecond,  the  prefent  time,  />. 
Had  proper  attention  been  paid  to  our  lan 
guage,  fo  many  palpable  miftakes  would 
not  have  crept  into  praftice,  and  into  the 

mofl 


DISSERTATION    IV.       *;j 

•moft  'correft  and  elegant  writings.  Dn 
Reid  is  perhaps  the  only  writer  who  has 
generally  avoided  this  error. 

THE  Greek  and  Roman  writers  Were  hot 
guilty  of  fuch  miftakes.  Either  the  vari 
eties  of  inflection  in  their  languages,  or 
fuperior  care  in  the  writers,  made  them 
attentive  to  the  nice  diftinftions  of  time. 
In  the  following  paffage,  the  tranflators  of 
the  Bible,  by  adhering  clofely  to  the  orig^ 
inal,  have  avoided  the  common  error  before 
mentioned. 

"  I  KNEW  thee  that  thou  art  an  hard 
man." — Matth.  xxv.  24.  "  Ehw  o1»  o-xAnpor  « 
ai/OfjwTTor  ;"  literally,  having  known  that  thou 
art  an  hard  man.  So  alio  ver.  26,  "  Thou 
wicked  and  flothful  fervant,  thou  kneweft 
that  I  reap,  where  I  fowed  not  •,"  u  r&ir  o7» 
&PI£«."  Had  thefe  pafTages  been  tranflated 
into  the  carelefs  ftile  of  modern  converfa- 
tion,  and  even  of  many  excellent  writings, 
they  would  have  flood  thus — "  I  knew 
thee  that  thou  waji  an  hard  man" — "  thou 
kneweft  that  I  reaped  where  I  fow  not." 
But  the  general  character  and  conduct  pf 
the  perfon  mentioned  in  this  parable,  are 
fuppofed  to  exift  at  all  times  while  he  is 
iiving  ;  and  this  general  nature  of  the  faft 
S  2  requires 


276     DISSERTATION    IV. 

requires  the  verb  to  be  in  the  prefent  time. 
To  confirm  this  remark  let  the  fentences 
be  inverted  ;  "  thou  art  an  hard  man,  I 
knew  thee  to  be  fuch,  or  I  knew  it."  cc  I 
reap  where  I  fowed  not,  thou  kneweft  that." 
This  is  an  indubitable  evidence  of  the  ac 
curacy  of  the  tranflation.* 

AN 
I 

*  A  PASSAGE  in  Dr.  Middleton's  Life  of  Cicero,  is  re 
markably  accurate  ;  «  The  celebrated  orator,  L.  Caflius, 
died  of  the  fame  difeafe  (the  pleurify,)  which  might  proba 
bly  be  then,  as  I  was  told  in  Rome  it  is  now,  the  peculiar 
diftemper  of  the  place."  Was  refers  to  time  completely 
paft  ;  but  is  declares  a  fact  that  exifts  generally,  at  all  times  ; 
the  verb  is  therefore  in  the  prefent  tenfe,  or  as  Harris  terms 
it,f  the  aorift'of  the  prefent.  So  alfo  in  Dr.  Reid's  Effays, 
Xrol.  i.  p.  18.  «  Thofe  philofophers  held,  that  there  are 
three  firft  principles  of  all  things  ;"  which  is  correct  Bng- 
lifh.  "  Ariftotle  thought  every  object  of  human  under- 
Handing  enters  at  firft  by  the  fenfes."— - Page  no.  The  fol 
lowing  paifage  is  equally  correct.  "  There  is  a  courage 
depending  on  nerves  and  blood,  which  was  improved  to 
the  higheft  pitch  among  the  Greeks."  'Gillies,  Hift.  of 
Greece,  vol.  i.  p.  248.  This  courage  is  derived  from  the 
conftitution  of  the  human  body  ;  it  exifts  therefore  at  all 
times  ;  and  had  our  author  faid,  "  there  was  a  courage  de 
pending  on  nerves  and  blood,  which  the  Greeks  improved 
to  the  higheft  pitch,"  the  fenfe  would  have  been  left  im 
perfect.  Here  then  xve  fee  the  indefinite  ufe  of  this  form 
of  the  prefent  tenfe  ;  for  were  the  verb  is,  in  the  foregoing 
example,  limited  to  time  now  prefent^  it  would  make  the  au 
thor  write  nonfenfe  ;  it  being  abfurd  to  fay,  "  the  Greeks 
2000  years  ago  improved  a  courage  which  exifts  only  at  the 
prefent  time."  So  that  verbs,  in  the  prefent  tenfe,  exprefs 
facts  that  have  an  uninterrupted  exiftence  in  pa/!9  prefent, 
and  future  time. 

t  HERMES,  page  123. 


DISSERTATION    IV.       277 

AN  inverfion  of  the  order  of  the  fentence 
in  the  paflages  firft  quoted,  will  {how  the 
common  error  in  a  moft  finking  light. 

"  THERE  was  a  God,  two  young  men 
have  made  that  difcovery."  "Men  did 
God  acceptable  fervice,  by  abftrafting  them- 
felves,  &c.  they  have  been  taught  this  ;  it 
was  their  duty,  they  have  been  taught  this/' 
c<  The  taxes  we  bad  to  pay  to  government, 
if  thefe  were  the  only  ones."  This  will 
not  make  fenfe  to  a  man  who  has  taxes  Jlill 
to  pay ;  the  writer's  had  to  pay  will  not  dif- 
charge  the  public  debt.  But  it  is  unne~ 
ceflary  to  multiply  examples  and  arguments; 
the  reader  muft  be  already  convinced  that 
thefe  errors  exift,  and  that  I  ought  not  to 
have  been  the  firft  to  notice  them. 

SOMETIMES  this  hypothetical  tenfe  is 
ufed  with  an  infinitive  for  the  future.  In 
the  following  paffage  it  feems  to  be  correct. 

<c  I  WISH  I  were  to  go  to  the  Elyfian 
fields,  when  I  die,  and  then  I  fhould  not 
care  if  I  were  to  leave  the  world  tomor 
row." Pope. 

BUT  the  following  are  hardly  vindicable, 

<c  SUPPOSE  they  marched  up  to  our  mines 
With  a  numerous  army,  how  could  they 
S  3  fubfift  ' 


-*  < 


278      DISSERTATION    IV. 

fubfift  for  want  of  provifion."— *-Moyle, 
Diff.  on  the  Rev.  of  Athens. 

"  IF  they  foraged  in  fmall  parties." 

Same. 

THE  fenfe  is  future,  and  therefore  JJmdd 
mar  ch^Jhould  forage^  would  have  been  more 
correct. 

cc  I  SHOULD  not  aft  the  part  of  an  im 
partial  fpeftator,  if  I  dedicated  the  follow 
ing  papers  to  one  who  is  not  of  the  moft 

confummate  and  acknowleged  merit*" 

Specl.  Dedic. 

IF  I  Jhould  dedicate^  would  have  been 
more  accurate. 

A  SIMILAR  fault  occurs  in  the  follow 
ing  paffage. 

«  IF  nature  thundtr'd  in  his  opening  ears, 
Andjtumi'd  him  with  the  mufic  of  the  fphercs.5' 
Pope,  Effay  on  Man. 

IF  nature  ficuld  thunder  zndjlun  him,  is 
the  meaning. 

THERE  is  another  article  that  deferves 
to  be  mentioned  ;  which  is,  the  ufe  of  a 
verb  after  as  or  tban^  apparently  without  a 
nominative. 

«  THIS 


DISSERTATION     IV.       279 

"  THIS  unlimited  power  is  what  the  beft 
legiflators  of  all  ages  have  endeavored  to 
depofit  in  fuch  hands,  as  would  prefers  the 

people  from  rapine." Swift,   vol.    2. 

Contefts,  &c. 

"  WOULD  prefer<ve"  feems  to  have  no 
nominative,  for  hands  cannot  be  inferted 
without  changing  the  form  of  the  fentence; 
in  thofe  hands  which  would  preferve. 

"  A  HYPOCRITE  hath  fo  many  things  to 
attend  to,  as  make  his  life  a  very  perplexed 
and  intricate  thing." Tillotfon. 

THIS  mode  of  expreffion  is  however  well 
eftablifhed  and  occafions  no  obfcurity. 
The  truth  is,  as  is  an  article  or  relative  e- 
quivalent  to  that  or  which  -,  and  the  criti- 
cifms  of  Lowth  on  the  conjunctions,  where 
he  condemns  the  ufe  of  as  and  fo  in  a  num 
ber  of  inftances,  prove  that  he  knew  noth 
ing  about  the  true  meaning  of  thefe  words. 
See  Diverfions  of  Purley,  page  283. 

ANOTHER  form  of  expreffion,  peculiar 
to  our  language,  is  the  participial  noun,  a 
word  derived  from  a  verb,  and  having  the 
properties,  both  of  a  verb  and  a  noun  ;  as, 
"  I  heard  of  his  acquiring  a  large  eftate." 
Acquiring  here  expreffes  the  aft-  done,  the 

acquilition  * 


28o       DISSERTATION     IV. 

•  -   • 

acquilition;  yet  governs  the  following  ob«* 
jeftive  cafe,  eftate.  When  a  noun  precedes 
the  participle,  it  takes  the  fign  of  the  pof- 
feffive,  cc  I  heard  of  a  mans  acquiring  an 
eftate."  This  is  the  genuin  Englifh  idi 
om  5  and  yet  modern  writers  very  improp 
erly  omit  the  fign  of  the  poffeiiive,  as,  I 
heard  of  a  man  acquiring  aa  eftate.  This 
omiffion  often  changes  the  fenfe  of  the 
phrafe  or  leaves  it  ambiguous, 

THE  omiffion  of  the  fign  of  the  poffefF- 
ive  in  the  following  example  is  a  very  great 
fault. 

"  OF  a  general  or  public  aft,xthe  courts 
of  law  are  bound  to  take  notice  judicially 
and  ex  officio>  without  the  Jlatute  being 
particularly  pleaded." — — Blackftone  Com 
ment,  vol.  i.  p.  86. 

THE  prepofition  without  here  governs 
the  phrafe  following,  which  might  other- 
wife  be  properly  arranged  thus,  without 
.  the  particular  pleading  of  the  Jlatute^  or 
without  pleading  the  Jlatute  particularly. 
But  as  the  fentence  fl^nds,  there  is  nothing 
to  fhow  the  true  conilruflion,  or  how  the 
fentence  may  be  refolved  :  Being  audflead- 
sd  both  ftand  ^s  participles  ;  whereas  the 

conftruftion 


DISSERTATION     IV.       281 

conftruftion  requires  that  they  fhould  be 
confidered  as  {landing  for  a  noun  -y  for 
without  does  not  govern  Jlatute  ;  without  the 
ftatute,  is  not  the  meaning  of  the  writer.  But 
it  governs  pleading,  or  refers  immediately  to 
that  idea  or  union  of  ideas,  exprefled  t>y  be 
ing  particularly  pleaded.  As  thefe  laft  words 
reprefent  a  noun,  which  is  immediately 
governed  by  the  prepofition,  without*  the  ' 
word  Jlatute  fhould  have  the  fign  of  the 
pofleffive,  as  much  as  any  word  iu  the  gen 
itive  cafe,  'without  the  Jlatute  s  being  particu-. 
larly  pleaded ;  that  is,  without  the  particu 
lar  pleading  of  the  Jlatute  by  the  parties  ; 
for  in  order  to  make  grammar  or  fenfe, 
ftatute  muft  be  in  the  poffeffive. 

To  confirm  thefe  remarks,  I  would  juft 
add,  that  when  we  fubftitute  a  pronoun  in 
fuch  cafes,  we  always  ufe  the  poffeffive  cafe. 
Suppofe  the  word  Jlatute  had  been  previ- 
oufly  ufed,  in  the  fentence ;  the  writer  then 
would  have  ufed  the  pronoun  in  the  clofe 
of  the  fentence,  thus  >  "without  its  being 
particularly  pleaded  ;"  and  I  prefume  that 
no  perfon  will  contend  for  the  propriety 
of,  "  without  it  being  pleaded.'' 

So  we  fhould  fay,   <c  a  judge  will  not 
proceed  to  try  a  criminal,  without  bis  be 
ing 


282      DISSERTATION    IV. 

Ing  prefent."  But  would  it  be  correft  to 
fay,  without  him  being  prefent  ?  This 
mode  of  fpeaking  will  not,  I  am  confident, 
be  advocated  :  But  unlels  I  am  miftak- 
en,  this  laft  expreffion  ftands  on  a  foot 
ing  with  the  example  cited,  without  the 
flatute  being  pleaded.  Numberlefs  fimilar 
examples  occur  in  thofe  modern  writers 
who  aim  at  refinement  of  language.  "  If 
we  can  admit  the  doctrine  of  the  Jlomach 
having  a  general  confent  with  the  whole 
fyftem." — "  On  account  of  thejyftem  being 
too  highly  toned/*  &c.  It  is  ftrange  the 
writers  of  fuch  language  do  not  fee  that 
there  are  in  faft  two  poireffives  in  fuch 
phrafes — "  on  account  of  the.  too  high  ton 
ing  of  the  fyftem,"  and  that  both  fhould  be 
exprefled;  thus/' on  account  ofthejjftcms 
being  too  high  toned." 

IT  may  be  queftioned  whether  the  verb 
need  may  not  with  propriety  be  ufed  in  the 
third  perfon  fmgular  of  the  indicative, 
prefent,  without  the  ufual  termination  of 
that  perfon.  Practice  will  at  leaft  war 
rant  it. 

M  BUT  tho  the  principle  is  to  be  ap 
plauded,  the  error  cannot,  and,  in  this  en 
lightened  age,  happily  need  not  be  defend 
ed," JErlkine,  Orat.  Temp.  vol.  i.  p.  95, 

<l  Now 


DISSERTATION    IV.       283 

"  Now  a  perfon  need  but  enter  into  him- 
felf  and  refleft  on  the  operations  of  his 
own  mind."  -  Nugent's  Burlamaqui,  1.9, 

"  HENCE  it  was  adjudged,  that  the  ufe 
need  not  always  be  executed  the  inftant  the 
conveyance  is  made."—  Blackftone,  Com. 
b.  2.  chap.  20. 

NUMBERLESS  authorities  of  this  kind 
may  be  produced  ;  but  we  may  fpare  the 
trouble,  and  only  advert  to  the  conftant 
practice  of  fpeakers  of  every  clafs  ;  "he 
need  not  •"  '  '  it  need  not,"  Indeed,  be  needs 
noty  altho  grammatically  correft,  is  fo  of* 
fenfive  to  moft  ears,  that  we  have  little 
reafon  to  expeft  people  will  be  perfuaded 
to  ufe  it. 

THE  fame  may  be  faid  of  dare  ;  "  he  darq 
not." 


mijlaken>  Lowth  reprobates  as  ba<J 
Englifh  ;  afferting  that  the  phrafe  is  equiv 
alent  to  7  am  mifunderflovd.  In  this  criti- 
cifm  the  Biihop  is  miflaken  moft  grofsly, 
Whether  the  phrafe  is  a  corruption  of  am 
mi/taking  or  not,  is  wholly  immaterial  j  in 
the  fenfe  the  Englifh  '  have  ufed  it  from 
time  immemorial  and  univerfally,  miflaken 

is 


284      DISSERTATION    IV. 

is  a  mere  adje<5tive,  fignifying  that  one  is 
in  an  error  ;  and  this  fenfe  the  Bifhop 
ihould  have  explained,  and  not  rejefted  the 
phrafe, 

PARTICLES. 

THE  fame  author  difapproves  of  to  af 
ter  averfe ;  another  example  of  his  hafty 
decifion.  The  praftice  of  good  writers 
and  fpeakers  is  almoft  wholly  in  favor  of 
to,  and  this  is  good  authority  ;  the  propri 
ety  of  the  Englifh  particles  depending  aU 
moft  folely  on  their  ufe,  without  any  ref 
erence  to  Latin  rules.  Averfe  is  ah  ad- 
jeftive,  defcribing  a  certain  ftate  or  quality 
of  the  mind,  without  regard  to  motion, 
and  therefore  averfe  from  is  as  improper  as 
contrary  from,  oppofedfrom,  or  reluct  ant  from. 
Indeed  in  the  original  fenfe  of  from,  ex 
plained  by  Mr.  Home  Tooke,  as  denoting 
beginning,  averfe  from  appears  to  be  non- 
fenfe. 

THE  following  phrafes  are  faid  to  be 
faulty  ;  previous  to,  antecedent  to,  with  oth 
ers  of  a  fimilar  nature.  The  criticifm  on 
thefe  expreffions  muft  have  been  made  on 
a  very  fuperficial  view  of  the  fabjecL  In 
this  fentence3  <c  previous  to  the  eftablifh- 

meat 


DISSERTATION    IV.      285 

ment  of  the  new  government,  the  refolu- 
tions  of  Congrefs  could  not  be  enforced  by 
fegal  compulfory  penalties  ;"  previous  re 
fers  to  the  word  time  or  fomething  equiv 
alent  implied,  at  the  time  previous,  or  during 
the  time  or  period,  previous  to  the  eftablifti- 
ment  of  the  new  government.  This  is  the 
ftrift  grammatical  refohition  of  the  phrafe ; 
and  the  ufual  correftion,  previoujlyy  is 
glaringly  abfurd ;  during  the  time  preinoujly 
to  the  eftablijkment  -y  into  fuch  wild  errors 
are  men  led  by  a  flight  view  of  things,  or 
by  applying  the  principles  of  one  language 
to  the  conftru6tion  of  another.* 

"AGREEABLE  to  his  promife,  he  fent  me 
the  papers  ;"  here  agreeable  is  correft  ,  for 
it  refers  to  the  faft  done  ;  he  fent  me  the 
papers,  which  fending  was  agreeable  to  his 
promife.  In  fuch  cafes,  practice  has  often 
a  better  foundation  than  the  criticifms 
which  are  defigned  to  change  it. 

ACCORDING  is  tifually  numbered  among 
the  prepofitions  ;  but  moft  abfurdly  ;  it  is 

always 

*  PREVIOUS  may  be  vindicated  on  another  principle ; 
viz.  by  confidering  it  as  qualifying  the  whole  fubfequent 
member  of  the  fentence.  "  The  refolutions  of  Congrefs 
could  not  be  enforced  by  legal  penalties  ;  this/a^  was  pre 
vious  to  the  eflablifhment,"  &c.  But  the  other  ie  the  real 
conftruftion. 


286      DISSERTATION 


always  a  participle,  and  has  always  a  ref 
erence  to  fome  noun  or  member  of  a  fen- 
tence.  "According  to  his  promife,  he  called 
on  me  laft  evening."  Here  according  re 
fers  to  the  whole  fubfequent  member  of 
the  fentence  ;  "  he  called  on  me  laft  even 
ing,  which  (the  whole  of  which  fafts)  was 
according  to  his  promife."  No  perfon  pre 
tends  that  <f  accordingly  to  his  promife"  is 
good  Englifh  ;  yet  the  phrafe  is  not  more 
incorre6l  than  "  agreeably  to  his  promife," 
or  "previously  to  this  event,"  which  the 
modern  critics  and  refiners  of  our  language 
have  recommended* 

"  WHO  do  you  fpeak  to  ?"  cc  Who  did  he 
marry  ?"  are  challenged  as  bad  Englifh  ; 
but  whom  do  you  fpeak  to  ?  was  never  ufed 
in  fpeaking,  as  I  can  find,  and  if  fo,  is 
hardly  Englifh  at  all.  There  is  no  doubt, 
in  my  mind,  that  the  Englifh  who  and  the 
Latin  qui,  are  the  fame  word  with  mere  va 
riations  of  dialect.  Who,  in  the  Gothic  or 
Teutonic,  has  always  anfwered  to  the  Lat 
in  nominative,  qui  ;  the  dative  cut,  which 
was  pronounced  like  qui  ;  and  the  ablative 
quo  ;  in  the  fame  manner  as  whofe  has  an 
fwered  to  cujus,  in  all  genders  ;  'whom  to 
quern,  quam,  and  what  to  quod.  So  that 
•who  did  he  fpeak  to  ?  Who  did  you  go  with-? 

were 


DISSERTATION    IV.      287 

were  probably  as  good  Englifh,  in  ancient 
times,  as  cui  dixit  ?  Cum  quo  ivifti  ?  ia  Lat> 
in.  Nay,  it  is  more  than  probable  that 
who  was  once  wholly  ufed  in  afking  quef- 
tions,  even  in  the  obje£tive  cafe  ;  who  did 
he  marry  ?  until  fome  Latin  ftudent  began 
to  fufpeft  it  bad  Englifh,  becaufe  not  a- 
greeable  to  the  Latin  rules.  At  any  rate, 
•whom  do  you  fpeak  to  ?  is  a  corruption, 
and  all  the  grammars  that  can  be  formed 
will  not  extend  the  ufe  of  the  phrafe  be 
yond  the  walls  of  a  college. 

THE  foregoing  criticifms  will  perhaps 
illuftrate  and  confirm  an  aflertion  of  Mr. 
Home  Tooke,  that  "  Lowth  has  rejected 
much  good  Englifh."  I  fhould  go  farther 
and  aflert  that  he  has  criticized  away  more 
phrafes  of  good  Englifh,  than  he  has  cor 
rected  of  bad.  He  has  not  only  miftaken 
the  true  conftruftion  of  many  phrafes,  but 
he  has  rejefled  others  that  have  been  ufed 
generally  by  the  Englifh  nation  from  the 
earlieft  times,  and  by  arbitrary  rules,  fub- 
ftituted  phrafes  that  have  been  rarely,  or 
never  ufed  at  all.  To  deteft  fuch  errors, 
and  reftrain  the  influence  of  fuch  refpeft- 
able  names,  in  corrupting  the  true  idiom  of 
our  tongue,  I  conceive  to  be  the  duty  of 
every  friend  to  American  literature. 


288      DISSERTATION    IV* 

ON  examining  the  language,  and  com* 
paring  the  pra6tice  of  fpeaking  among  the 
yeomanry  of  this  country,  with  the  ftile  of 
Shakefpear  and  Addifon,  I  am  conftrained 
to  declare  that  the  people  of  America,  in 
particular  the  Englifh  defendants,  fpeak 
the  moil  pure  Englijh  now  known  in  the 
world.  There  is  hardly  a  foreign  idiom 
in  their  language  5  by  which  I  mean,  a 
fhrafe  that  has  not  been  ufed  by  the  be  ft 
Englifh  writers  from  the  time  of  Chaucer. 
They  retain  a  few  obfolete  words  y  which 
have  been  dropt  by  writers,  probably  from 
mere  affectation,  as  thofe  which  are  fubfti- 
tuted  are  neither  more  melodious  nor  ex- 
preffive.  In  many  inftances  they  retain 
correft  phrafes,  inftead  of  which  the  pre 
tended  refiners  of  the  language  have  intro 
duced  thofe  which  are  highly  improper  and 
abfurd. 

LET  Ehglifhmen  take  notice  that  when 
I  fpeak  of  the  American  yeomanry,  the 
latter  are  not  to  be  compared  to  the  illit 
erate  peafantry  of  their  own  country.  The 
yeomanry  of  this  country  confift  of  fub- 
ftantial  independent  freeholders,  matters  of 
their  own  perfons  and  lords  of  their  own 
foil.  Thefe  men  have  confiderable  educa 
tion.  They  not  only  learn  to  read,  write 

and 


DISSERTATION    IV.      289 

and  keep  accounts  $  but  a  vaft  proportion 
of  them  read  newfpapers  every  week,  and 
befides  the  Bible,  which  is  found  in  all 
families,  they  read  the  beft  Englifh.  fer- 
mons  and  treatifes  upon  religion,  ethics* 
geography  and  hiftory  ;  fuch  as  the  works 
of  Watts,  Addifon,  Atterbury,  Salmon,  &c. 
In  the  eaftern  ftates,  there  are  public 
fchools  fufficient  to  inftru6t  every  man's 
children,  and  moft  of  the  children  are 
actually  benefited  by  thefe  inftitutions; 
The  people  of  diftant  counties  in  Eng 
land  can  hardly  underftand  one  anoth 
er,  fo  various  are  their  dialects  ;  but  in 
the  extent  of  twelve  hundred  miles  in  A- 
merica,  there  are  very  few,  I  queftion 
whether  a  hundred  words,  except  fuch  as 
are  ufed  in  employments  wholly  local, 
which  arc  not  univerfally  intelligible. 

BUT  unlefs  the  rage  for  imitating  for 
eign  changes  can  be  refcrained,  this  agree  - 
ble  and  advantageous  uniformity  will  be 
gradually  deftroyed.  The  ftandard  writ 
ers  abroad  give  us  local  praftice,  the  mo 
mentary  whims  of  the  great,  or  their  own 
arbitrary  rules  to  direct  our  pronuncia 
tion  ;  and  we,  the  apes  of  fafMon,  fubmit 
to  imitate  any  thing  we-  hear  and  fee. 
Sheridan  has  introduced  or  given  fanftion 
T  t» 


290      DISSERTATION    IV. 

to  more  arbitrary  and  corrupt  changes  of 
pronunciation,  within  a  few  years,  than 
had  before  taken  place  in  a  century  ,  and 
in  Perry's  Dictionary,  not  to  mention  the 
errors  in  what  he  moft  arrogantly  calls  his 
"  Only  fare  Guide  to  the  Englifh  Tongue," 
there  are  whole  pages  in  which  there  are 
fcarcely  two  or  three  words  marked  for  a 
juft  pronunciation.  There  is  no  Diftion- 
ary  yet  published  in .  Great  Britain,  in 
which  fo  many  of  the  analogies  of  the 
language  and  the  juft  rules  of  pronuncia 
tion  are  preferved,  as  in  the  common  prac-< 
tice  of  the  well  informed  Americans;  who 
have  never  confulted  any  foreign  ftandard : 
Nor  is  there  any  grammatical  treatife,  ex 
cept  Dr.\  Prieftley's,  which  has  explained 
the  real  ioiorns  of  the  language,  as  they  are 
found  in  Addifon's  works,  and  which  re 
main  to  this  day  in  the  American  pra6lice 
of  fpeaking. 

THE  refult  of  the  whole  is,  that  we 
fhould  adhere  to  our  own  praftice  and  gen 
eral  cuftoms,  unlefs  it  can  be  made  very 
obvious  that  fuch  praftice  is  wrong,  and 
that  a  change  will  produce  fome  confider- 


able  advantage. 


DISSERTATION 


P  DISSERTATION   V. 


Of  the  Conjlruftion  ofEnglifi  Verfe.—Pdufes* 
-*-ExpreJ)ion.  —  Of  reading  Verfe* 


Of  the  CONSTRUCTION  */  ENGLISH 
VERSE. 


S  poetry  has  ever  been 
bered  among  the  fine  arts, 
and  has  employed  the  pens 
of  the  firft  geniufes  in  all 
nations,  an  inveftigation  of 
the  fubjeft  muft  be  gratify-^ 
ing  to  readers  of  tafte.  And  it  muft  be 
the  more  agreeable,  as  it  has  been  much 
neglefted,  and  the  nature  and  conftrutStion 
of  Englifh  verfe  have  frequently  been  mif- 
underftood. 

MOST  profodians  who  have  treated  par 
ticularly  of  this  fubjeft,  have  been  guilty 
of  a  fundamental  error,  in  confidering  the 
T  2  movement 


292       DISSERTATION    V. 

movement  of  Englifh  verfe  as  depending 
on  long  and  fliort  fyllables,  formed  by  long 
and  fhort  vowels.  This  hypothefis  has  led 
them  into  capital  miftakes.  The  truth  is, 
many  of  thofe  fyllables  which  are  confid- 
ered  as  long  in  verfe,  are  formed  by  the 
fhorteft  vowels  in  the  language >  *&ftrengthy 
health^  grand.  The  doftrine,  that  long 
vowels  are  requifite  to  form  long  fyllables 
in  poetry,  is  at  length  exploded,  and  the 
principles  which  regulate  the  movement 
of  our  verfe,  are  explained  ;  viz.  accent  and 
emphafis.  Every  emphatical  word,  and  ev 
ery  accented  fyllable,  will  form  what  is 
called  in  verfe,  a  long  fyllable.  The  un 
accented  fyllables,  and  unemphatical  mon- 
ofyliabic  words,  are  confidcred  as  fhort  fyl-* 
lables. 

BUT  there  are  two  kinds  of  emphafis  5 
a  natural  emphafis,  which  arifes  from  the 
importance  of  the  idea  conveyed  by  a  word ; 
and  an  accidental  emphafis,  which  arifes 
from  the  importance  of  a  word  in  a  par 
ticular  fituation, 

THE  firft  or  natural  emphafis  belongs  to 
all  nouns,  verbs,  participles  and  adjeftives, 
and  requires  no  elevation  of  voice  j  as, 

"  NCJT  balffofwift  the  trembling  doves  can/j." 

THE 


DISSERTATION    V.      293 

THE  laft  or  accidental  emphafis  is  laid 
on  a  word  when  it  has  fome  particular 
meaning,  and  when  the  force  of  a  fentence 
depends  on  it ;  this  therefore  requires  an 
elevation  of  voice  ;  as, 

"  PERDITION  catch  my  foul — but  I  do  love  tlree." 

So  far  the  profody  of  the  Englifh  lan 
guage  feems  to  be  fettled  ;  but  the  rules 
laid  down  for  the  conftruftion  of  verfe, 
feem  to  have  been  imperfect  and  difputecL 

WRITERS  have  generally  fuppofetl  that 
our  heroic  verfe  confifts  of  five  feet,  all 
pure  Iambics,  except  the  firfi  foot,  which 
they  allow  may  be  a  Trochee.  In  confe- 
quence  of  this  opinion,  they  have  expunged 
letters  from  words  which  were  necefiary  $ 
and  curtailed  feet  in  fuch  a  manner  as  to 
disfigure  the  beauty  of  printing,  and  in 
many  inftances,  deftroyed  the  harmony  of 
our  beft  poetry. 

THE  truth  is,  fo  far  is  our  heroic  verfe 
from  being  confined  to  the  Iambic  meafure, 
that  it  admits  of  eight  feet,  and  in  fome 
inftances  of  nine.  I  will  not  perplex  my 
readers  with  a  number  of  hard  names,  but 
proceed  to  explain  the  feveral  feet,  and 
T  3  fliov/ 


294      DISSERTATION    V. 

{how  in  what  places  of  the  line  they  are  ad- 
miffible. 

AN  Iambic  foot,  which  is  the  ground  of 
Englifh  numbers,  confifts  of  two  fyllables, 
the  firft  foort  and  the  fecond  long.  This 
foot  is  admitted  into  every  place  of  the  line. 
Example,  all  Iambics. 

"  Where  flaVes  once  more  their  native  land  behold. 
No  fiends  torment,  no  chriftians  thirft  for  gold." 

Pope, 

THE  Trochee  is  a  foot  confifting  of  two 
fyllables,  the  firft  long  and  the  fecondyZw/. 
Example. 

"  Warms  m  the  fun,  refrefhes  in  the  breeze, 
Glews  m  the  ftars,  and  bloflbms  in  the  trees." 

Pope. 

THE  Trochee  is  not  admiffible  into  the 
fecond  place  of  the  line  j  but  in  the  third 
and  fourth  it  may  have  beauty,  when  it 
creates  a  correfpondence  between  the  found 
and  fenfe. 

"EvE  rightly  calFd  motlier  of  all  mankind." 
<l  AND  ilaggeredby  the  (Iroke,  drops  the  large  ox." 

THE  Spondee  is  a  foot  confifting  of  two 
long  fyllables.  This  may  be  ufed  in  any 
place  of  the  line. 


DISSERTATION    V.       295 

I,  "  Good  life  be  now  my  tafk,  my  doubts  are  done." 

Dry  den. 

2.  "As  fome  lone  mountain's  monftrous  growth  he  flood.'* 

Pope. 

But  it  has  a  greater  beauty,  when  preced 
ed  by  a  Trochee. 

"  Load  the  tall  bark  and  launch  into  the  main." 

3.  "  THE  mountain  goats  came  bounding  o'er  the  lawn." 

4.  "  HE  fpoke,  and  fpeaking  in  proud  /rmmph  fpread, 
The  long  contended  honors  of  her  head." 

Pope. 

5."  SINGED  arehis  brows,the  fcorching  lids^raf  Hack" 
¥  Pope. 

THE  Pyrrhic  is  a  foot  of  two  fhort  fylla- 
bles  ;  it  is  graceful  in  the  firft  and  fourth 
places,  and  is  admiffible  into  the  fecond 
and  third. 

1.  "Nor  in  the  helplefs  orphan  dread  a  foe." 

Pope. 

2.  • — "  ON  they  move, 
Indif.w/wbly  firm." Milton. 

3.  "THE  two  extremes  appear  like  man  and  wife, 
Coupled  together  for  the  fake  of  ftrife." 

Churchill. 

But  this  foot  is  moft  graceful  in  the  fourth 
place. 

"  THE  dying  gales  that  pant  upon  the  trees." 


296      DISSERTATION    V. 

"  To  fartheft  fhores  the  ambrofial  fpirit  flies. 
Sweet  to  the  world  and  grate/w/  to  the  fkies." 

41 

THE  Amphibrach  is  a  foot  of  three  fyl- 
Jables,  the  firft  and  third  fhort,  and  the 
fecond  long.  It  is  ufed  in  heroic  verfe  on 
ly  when  we  take  the  liberty  to  add  a  fhort 
iy  11  able  to  a  line. 


"THE 
I'm  all 


piece  you  fay  is  incorrect,  why  take  T/, 
fubmiflion,  what  you'd  have  z>a  make  it" 


THIS  foot  is  hardly  admiffible  in  the 
folemn  or  fublime  ftile.  Pope  has  indeed 
admitted  it  into  his  Effay  on  Man  : 

"  WHAT  can  ennoble  fots  qr  flaves  or  coward?, 
Alas  !  not  all  the  blood  of  all  the  Howards." 

AGAIN  : 

«  To  figh  for  ribbands,  if  thou  art  f 6  filly,      o 
Mark  how  they  grace  Lord  Umbra  or  Sir  Billy." 

But  thefe  lines  are  of  the  high  burlefque 
kind,  and  in  this  llile  the  Amphibrach 
clofes  lines  with  great  beauty. 

THE  Tribrach  is  a  foot  of  three  fyllables^ 
all  fhort ;  and  it  may  be  ufed  in  the  third 
and  fourth  places. 

"  AND  rolls  Impetuous  ft  the  fubje<3:  plain." 
OR  thus  : 
"  AND  thunders  down  impetK<?^  to  the  plain. 5l? 

THE 


DISSERTATION    V.      397 

THE  Daclyl,  a  foot  of  three  fyllables? 
the  firft  long  and  the  two  laft  fhort,  is  ufed 
principally  in  the  firft  place  in  the  line. 

"  Furious  he  fpoke,  the  angry  chief  replied/' 
"Murmuring  arid  with  him  fled  the  fhades 


THE  Anapseft,  a  foot  confifting  of  three 
fyllables,  the  two  firft  fhort  and  the  laft 
long,  is  admiffible  into  every  place  of  the 
line- 

"  Can  a  bofam  fo  gentle  remain, 
y n moved  when  her  Corydon  fighs  ? 
Will  a  nymph  that  is  fond  of  the  plains, 
Thefe  plains  and  thefe  valleys  defpife  ? 
Dear  regions  of  filence  and  (hade. 
Soft  fcenes  of  contentment  and  eafe, 
Where  1  could  have  pleafmgly  ftay'd, 
If  ought  in  her  abfence  could  pleale." 

THE  trifly  llabic  feet  have  fuffered  moft 
by  the  general  ignorance  of  critics  ;  moft 
of  them  have  been  mutilated  by  apoftro-^ 
phes,  in  order  to  reduce  them  to  the  Iambic 
meafure. 

THUS  in  the  line  before  repeated, 

"Murmuring,  and  with  him  fled  the.  ihades  of  night,** 

we  find  the  word  in  the  copy  reduced  to 
two  fyllables,  murmring^  and  the  beauty  cf 
f:}ie  Da£tyl  is  deftroyed. 


298      DISSERTATION    V. 

THUS  in  the  following  : 

"  ON  every  fide  with  fhadowy  fquadrons  deep," 

by  apoftrophizing  every  and  Jhadowy,  the 
line  lofes  its  harmony.  The  fame  remark 
applies  to  the  following  : 

"  AND  hofts  infuriate  fhake  the  fhudd'ring  plain." 

"BuT  fafhion'fo  directs,  and  moderns  raife 
On  fafhion's  moyld'ring  bafe,  their  tranfient  praife." 

Churchill. 

POETIC  lines  which  abound  with  thefe 
triflyllabic  feet,,  are  the  moft  flowing  and 
melodious  of  any  in  the  language ;  and  yet 
the r  poets  themfelves,  or  their  printers, 
murder  them  with  numberlefs  unneceflary 
contractions. 

IT  requires  but  little  judgement  and  an 
car  indifferently  accurate,  to  diftinguilh  the 
contra6lions  which  are  neceflary,  from  thofe 
which  are  needlefs  and  injurious  to  the 
verification.  In  the  following  paflage  we 
find  examples  of  both. 

"SHE  went  from  op'ra,  park,  aflembly,  play, 
To  morning  walks  and  pray'rs  three  times  a  day ; 
To  part  her  time  'tvvixt  reading  and  bohea, 
To  mufe  and  fpill  her  folitary  tea  ; 
Or  o'er  cold  coffee  trifle  with  the  fpoon, 
Count  the  llow  clock,  and  dine  exact  at  noon ; 
Divert  her  eyes  with  pictures  in  the  fire, 
Hum  half  a  tune,  tell  ftories  to  the  'fquire  •, 

Up 


DISSERTATION    V,      299 

Up  to  her  godly  garret  after  fev'n, 
There  ftarve  and  pray,  for  that's  the  way  to  heav'n." 

Pope's  Epiftles. 

HERE  e  in  opera  ought  not  to  be  apof- 
trophized,  for  fuch  a  contraftion  reduces 
an  Amphibrachic  foot  to  an  Iambic.  The 
words  prayers,  feven  and  heaven  need  not 
the  apoftrophe  of  e ;  for  it  makes  no  dif 
ference  in  the  pronunciation.  But  the 
contraction  of  over  and  betwixt  is  necefTa- 
ry  ;  for  without  it  the  meafure  would  be 
imperfect. 

P  A  US  E  S. 

HAVING  explained  the  feveral  kinds  of 
feet,  and  fhown  in  what  places  of  a  verfe 
they  may  be  ufed,  I  proceed  to  another  im 
portant  article,  the  paufes .  Of  thefe  there 
are  two  kinds,  the  cefural  paufe,  which  di 
vides  the  line  into  two  equal  or  unequal 
parts  ;  and  the  final  paufe  which  clofes  the 
verfe.  Thefe  paufes  are  called  mufical^  be- 
caufe  their  fole  end  is  the  melody  of  verfe. 

THE  paufes  which  mark  the  fenfe,  and 
for  this  reafon  are  denominated  fentential* 
are  the  fame  iti  verfe  as  in  prole.  They 
are  marked  by  the  ufual  ftops,  a  comma,  a 
femicolon,  a  colon^  or  a  period,  as  the 

fenfe 


3co      DISSERTATION    V. 

fenfe  requires,  and  need  no  particular  ex 
planation. 

THE  cefural  paufe  is  not  effential  to 
verfe,  for  the  fhorter  kinds  of  meafure  are 
without  it  \  but  it  improves  both  the  mel 
ody  and  the  harmony. 

MELODY  in  mufic  is  derived  from  a  fuc- 
ceffion  of  founds  ^  harmony  from  different 
founds  in  concord.  A  fingle  voice  can  pro 
duce  melody  ;  a  union  of  voices  is  neceifa*- 
ry  to  form  harmony.  In  this  fenfe  har 
mony  cannot  be  applied  to  verfe,  becaufe 
poetry  is  recited  by  a  fingle  voice.  But 
harmony  may  be  ufed  in  a  figurative  fenfe, 
to  exprefs  the  effect  produced  by  obferving 
the  proportion  which  the  members  of  verfe 
bear  to  each  other.* 

THE  cefural  paufe  maybe  placed  in  any 
part  of  the  verfe  \  but  has  the  fineft  effeft 
upon  the  melody,  when  placed  after  the 
iecond  or  third  foot,  or  in  the  middle  of 
the  third.,  After  the  fecond  : 

"  IN  what  retreat,  inglorious  and  unknown, 

Did  genius  fleep,  when  dulnefs  feizcd  the  throne." 

AFTER  the  third  : 

<< 

*  SHERIDAN'S  Art  of  Reading. 


DISSERTATION    V.      jot 

"O  SAY  what  Granger  caufe,  yet  unexplored, 
Could  make  a  gentle  belle  rejed  a  lord  ?" 

IN  the  middle  .of  the  third  : 

"  GREAT  are  his  perils,  in  this  ftormy  time^ 
Who  rafhly  ventures,  on  a  fea  of  rhime." 

IN  thefe  examples  we  find  a  great  degree 
of  melody,  but  not  in  all  the  fame  degree. 
In  comparing  the  divifions  of  verfe,  we  ex 
perience  the  moft  pleafure  in  viewing  thofe 
which  are  equal ;  hence  thofe  verfes  which 
have  the  paufe  in  the  middle  of  the  third 
foot,  which  is  the  middle  of  the  verfe,  are 
the  moft  melodious.  Such  is  the  third  ex 
ample  above. 

IN  lines  where  the  paufe  is  placed  after 
the  fecond  foot,  we  perceive  a  fmailer  de-. 
gree  of  melody,  for  the  divifions  are  not  e- 
qual ;  one  containing  four  fyllables,  the 
other  fix,,  as  in  the  firft  example. 

BUT  the  melody  in  this  example,  is  much 
fuperior  to  that  of  the  verfes  which  have 
the  cefural  paufe  after  the  third  foot ;  for 
this  obvious  reafon  :  When  the  paufe 
bounds  the  fecond  foot,  the  latter  part  of 
the  verfe  is  the  greateft,  and  leaves  the  moft 
forcible  impreifion  upon  the  mind  ;  but 
when  the  paufe  is  at  the  end  of  the  third 

foot, 


302       DISSERTATION    V, 

foot,  the  order  is  reverfed.  We  are  fond 
of  proceeding  from  fmall  to  great,  and  a 
climax  in  found,  pleafes  the  ear  in  the  fame 
manner  as  a  climax  in  fenfe  delights  the 
mind.  Such  is  the  firft  example. 

IT  muft  be  obferved  further,  that  when 
the  cefural  paufe  falls  after  the  fecond  and 
third  feet,  both  the  final  and  cefural  paufes 
are  on  accented  fyllables  ;  whereas  when 
the  cefural  paufe  falls  in  the  middle  of  the 
third  foot,  this  is  on  a  weak  fyllable,  and 
the  final  paufe,  on  an  accented  fyllable. 
This  variety  in  the  latter,  is  another  caufe 
of  the  fuperior  pleafure  we  derive  from 
verfes  divided  into  equal  portions. 

THE  paufe  may  fall  in  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  foot ;  as, 

"  LET  favor  fpeak  for  others,  worth  for  me  j" 

but  the  melody,  in  this  cafe,  is  almoft  loft. 
At  the  clofe  of  the  firft  foot,  the  paufe  has 
a  more  agreeable  effeft. 

"THAT'S  vile,  fhould  we  a  parent's  fault  adore, 
And  err,  becaufe  our^fathers  err'd  before  ?" 

IN  the  middle  of  the  fecond  foot,  the 
paufe  may  be  ufed,  but  produces  little  mel 
ody. 

«AND 


DISSERTATION    V.       303 

"  AND  who  but  wifhes  to  invert  the  laws 
Of  order,  fins  againft  the  eternal  caufe." 

HARMONY  is  produced  by  a  proportion 
between  the  members  of  the  fame  verfe,  or 
between  the  members  of  different  verfes. 
Example, 

"  THY  forefts,  Windfor,  and  thy  green  retreats^ 
At  once  the  monarch's)  and  the  mufe's  feats, 
Invite  my  lays.     Be  prefent  fylvan  maids, 
Unlock  your  fprings,  and  open  all  your  (hades. " 

HERE  we  obferve,  the  paufe  in  the  firffc 
couplet,  is  in  the  middle  of  the  third  foot ; 
both  verfes  are  in  this  refpeft  fimilar.  In 
the  laft  couplet,  the  paufe  falls  after  the 
fecond  foot.  In  each  couplet  feparately 
confidered,  there  is  a  uniformity ;  but  when 
one  is  compared  with  the  other,  there  is  a 
diverfity.  This  variety  produces  a  pleaf- 
ing  effeft.*  The  variety  is  further  en- 
creafed,  when  the  firft  lines  of  feveral  fuc- 
ceeding  couplets  are  uniform  as  to  them- 
felves,  and  different  from  the  laft  lines, 
which  are  alfo  uniform  as  to  themfelves. 
Churchill,  fpeaking  of  reafon,  lord  chief 
juftice  in  the  court  of  man,  has  the  follow 
ing  lines. 

"EQUALLY  form'd  to  rule,  in  age  and  youth, 
The  friend  of  virtue,  and  the  guide  to  vouth  ; 

To 

*  SHERIDAN, 


304      DISSERTATION    V. 

To  her  I  bow,  whofe  facred  power  I  feel ; 
To  her  deciilon,  make  my  lad  appeal  ; 
Condemned  by  her,  applauding  worlds  in  vain 
Should  tempt  me  to  take  up  my  pert  again  ; 
By  her  abfolv'd,  the  courfe  111  mil  puffue; 
If  Reafon's  for  me,  God  is  for  me  too." 

THE  firft  line  of  three  of  the'fe  couplets, 
has  the  paufe  after  the  fecond  foot ;  in  this 
confifts  their  fimilarity.  The  lail  line  in 
three  of  them,  has  the  paufe  in  the  middle 
of  the  third  foot ;  they  are  uniform  as  to 
themfelves,  but  different  from  the  forego 
ing  lines.  This  paflage,  v/hich  on  the 
whole  is  very  beautiful,  fuffers  much  by 
the  fixth  line,  which  is  not  verfe,  but  rath 
er  hobbling  profe.* 

THE  foregoing  remarks  are  fufficient  to 
illuftrate  the  ufe  and  advantages  of  the  cef- 
ural  paufe. 

THE  final  patife  marks  the  clofe  of  a  line 
or  verfe,  whether  there  is  a  paufe  in  the 

fenfe 

*  CHURCHILL  has  improved  Englifti  verification,  'but 
was  fometimes  too  incorrect.  It  is  a  remark  of  fome  writ 
er,  "  That  the  greateft  geniufes  are  feldom  correcV*  and  the 
remark  is  not  without  foundation.  Homer,  Shakefpear, 
and  Milton,  were  perhaps  the  greateft  geniufes  that  ever 
]ived,  and  (hey  were  certainly  guilty  of  the  greateft  faults. 
Virgil  and  Pope  were  much  inferior  in  point  of  genius,  but 
excelled  in  accuracy.  Churchill  had  genius,  but  his  con 
tempt  of  rules  made  him  fometimes  indulge  a  too  great  lat 
itude  of  expreffion. 


DISSERTATION    V.       305 

fenfe  or  not.  Sentential  paufes  fhould  be 
marked  by  a  variation  of  tone  -y  but  the  fi 
nal  paufe,  when  the  clofe  of  one  line  is  in 
timately  connected  with  the  beginning  of 
the  next,  fhould  be  merely  a  fufpenfion  of 
the  voice  without  elevation  or  depreffion. 
Thus  : 

"Or  man's  firft  difobedience,  and  the  fruit 
Of  that  forbidden  tree,  whofe  mortal  tafte 
fironght  death  into  the  world,  and  all  our  woe,"  &c. 

WHEN  thefe  lines  are  read  without  a 
paufe  after  the  words  fruit  and  tafte ',  they 
degenerate  into  profe.  Indeed  in  many 
inftances,  particularly  in  blank  verfe,  the 
final  paufe  is  the  only  circumftance  which 
diftinguifhes  verfe  from  profe. 

EXPRESSION. 

ONE  article  more  in  the  conftruftion 
of  verfe  deferves  our  obfervation,  which  is 
Expreffion-.  Expreffion  confifts  in  fuch  a 
choice  and  diftribution  of  poetic  feet  as  are 
beft  adapted  to  the  fubjeft,  and  beft  calcu 
lated  to  imprefs  fentiments  upon  the  mind. 
Thofe  poetic  feet,  which  end  in  an  accent 
ed  fyllable,  are  the  moft  forcible.  Hence 
the  Iambic  meafure  is  beft  adapted  to  fol- 
emn  and  fublime  fubjecls,  This  is  the 
U  meafure 


306      DISSERTATION    V. 

meafure  of  the  Epic,  of  poems  on  grave 
moral  fubje£ls,  of  elegies,  &e.  The  Spon 
dee,  a  foot  of  two  long  fyllables,  when  ad 
mitted  into  the  Iambic  meafure,  adds  much 
to  the  folemnity  of  the  movement. 

"WHILE  the  clear  fun,  rejoicing  dill  to  rife, 
In  pomp  rolls  round  immeasurable  fkies." 

DWight. 

THE  Daftyl,  rolls  round,  expreffes  beau 
tifully  the  majefty  of  the  fun  in  his  courfe, 

IT  is  a  general  rule,  that  the  more  im 
portant  fyllables  there  are  in  a  paflage, 
whether  of  profe  or  verfe,  the  more  heavy 
is  the  ftile.  For  example  : 

"A  PAST,  vamp'd,  future,  old,  reviv'd  new  piece." 
,  bearded,  bald,  cowl'd,  uncowl'd,  (hod,  unftiod." 


SUCH  lines  are  deftitute  of  melody  and 
are  admiffible  only  when  they  fuit  the  found 
to  the  fenfe.  In  the  high  burlefque  ftile, 
of  which  kind  is  Pope's  Dunciad,  they  give 
the  fentiment  an  ironical  air  of  importance, 
and  from  this  circumftance  derive  a  beau 
ty.  On  the  other  hand,  a  large  proportion 
of  unaccented  fyllables  or  particles,  deprives 
language  of  energy  ;  and  it  is  this  circum 
ftance  principally  which  in  profe  confti- 
tutes  the  difference  between  the  grave  hif- 

torical* 


DISSERTATION    V.      307 

torical,  and  the  familiar  ftile.  The  great- 
eft  number  of  long  fyllables  ever  admitted 
into  a  heroic  verfe,  is  feven,  as  in  the  fore 
going  y  the  fmalleft  number  is  three. 

"  OR  to  a  fad  variety  of  woe." 

THE  Trochaic  meafure,  in  which  every 
foot  clofes  with  a  weak  fyllable,  is  well 
calculated  for  lively  fubjefts. 

"  SOFTLY  fvveet  in  Lydian  meafures 
Soon  he  footh'd  his  foul  to  pleafures  ; 
War  he  fung  is  toil  and  trouble, 
Honor  but  an  empty  bubble,"  &c. 

THE  Anapasftic  meafure,  in  which  there 
are  two  Ihort  fyllables  to  one  long,  is  beft 
adapted  to  exprefs  the  impetuofity  of  paf- 
fion  or  aftion.  Shenftone  has  ufed  it  to 
great  advantage,  in  his  inimitable  paftoral 
ballad.  It  defcribes  beautifully  the  ftrong 
and  lively  emotions  which  agitate  the  lov 
er,  and  his  anxiety  to  pleaie,  which  con 
tinually  hurries  him  from  one  objeft  and 
one  exertion  to  another. 

"  I  HAVE  found  out  a  gift  for  my  fair, 
I  have  found  where  the  wood  pigeons  breed ; 
Yet  let  me  that  plunder  forbear, 
She  will  fay  'twas  a  barbarous  deed. 
For  he  ne'er  could  prove  true,  (he  averr'd, 
Who  could  rob  a  poor  bird  of  her  young  : 
And  I  lov'd  her  the  more  when  I  heard 
Such  tendernefs  fall  from  her  tongue." 

U  2  THE 


3o8       DISSERTATION    V. 

THE  Amphibrachic  meafure,  in  which 
there  is  a  long  fyllable  between  two  fhort 
ones,  is  beft  adapted  to  lively  comic  fub- 
jefts  ;  as  in  Addifon's  Rofamond, 

"  SINCE  conjugal  pafiion 

Has  come  into  fafhion, 
And  marriage  fo  bleft  on  the  throne  is, 

Like  Venus  I'll  fhine, 

Be  fond  and  be  fine, 
And  Sir  Trufty  fhall  be  my  Adonis." 

SUCH  a  meafure  gives  fentiment  a  ludi 
crous  air,  and  confequently  is  ill  adapted 
to  ferious  fubjefts. 

GREAT  art  may  be  ufed  by  a  poet  in 
diobfmg  words  and  feet  adapted  to  his 
fubjeft.  Take  the  following  fpecimen. 

"Now  here,  now  there,  the  warriors  fall ;  amain 
Groans  murmur,  armor  founds,,  and  fhouts  convulfe 
the  plain." 

THE  feet  in  the  laft  line  are  happily 
chofen.  The  flow  Spondee,  in  the  begin 
ning  of  the  verfe,  fixes  the  mind  upon  the 
difmal  fcene  of  woe  ;  the  folemnity  is 
heightened  by  the  paufes  in  the  middle  of 
the  fecond  and  at  the  end  of  the  third  foot  : 
But  when  the  poet  comes  to  ihake  the  plains, 
he  clofes  the  line  with  three  forcible  Iam 
bics, 

OF 


DISSERTATION     V.       309 

OF  a  limilar  beauty  take  the  following 

example. 

"  SHE  all  night  long,  her  amorous  defcant  fung." 

THE  poet  here  defigns  to  defcribe  the 
length  of  the  night,  and  the  mufic  of  the 
Nightingale's  fong.  The  firft  he  does  by 
two  flow  Spondees,  and  the  laft  by  four 
very  rapid  fyllables. 

THE  following  lines,  from  Gray's  Elegy, 
written  in  a  country  church  yard,  are  dif- 
tinguiftied  by  a  happy  choice  of  words. 

"FoR  who,  to  dumb  forgetfulnefs  a  prey, 
This  pleafing  anxious  being  e'er  refign'd  ? 
Left  the  warm  precinfts  of  the  cheerful  day, 
Nor  caft  one  longing  lingering  look  behind  ?" 

THE  words  longing  and  lingering  exprels 
moft  forcibly  the  reluctance  with  which 
mankind  quit  this  flate  of  exiftence. 

POPE  has  many  beauties  of  this  kind. 

"AND  grace  and  reafon,  fenfe  and  virtue  fplit, 
With  all  the  rath  dexterity  of  wit." 

THE  mute  confonants,  with  which  thefe 
lines  end,  exprefs  the  idea  of  rending  af un 
der,  with  great  energy  and  effect.  The 
words  rafh  and  dexterity  are  alib  judiciouf- 
}y  chofen. 

U  3  IN 


3io      DISSERTATION    V. 

IN  defcribing  the  delicate  fenfations  of 
the  moft  refined  Iove3  he  is  remarkable  for 
his  choice  of  fmooth  flowing  words.  There 
are  fome  pafifages  in  his  Eloifa  and  Abelard, 
^vhich  are  extended  to  confiderable  length, 
without  a  fingle  mute  confonant  or  harlh 
word. 

Of  READING    VERSE. 

WITH  refpe£l  to  the  art  of  reading 
verfe,  we  can  lay  down  but  a  few  fimple 
rules  -y  but  thefe  may  perhaps  be  ufeful. 

1.  WORDS  fhould  be  pronounced  as  they 
are  in  profe  and  in  converfation  ;  for  read 
ing  is  but  rehearfing  another's  converfation, 

2.  THE  emphafis  fhould  be  obferved  as 
in  profe.     The  voice  fhould  bound  from 
accent  to  accent,  and  no  ftrefs  fhould  be 
laid  on  little  unimportant  words,  nor  oi} 
weak  fyllables. 

3.  THE  fentential  paufes  fhould  be  ob 
ferved  as  in  profe  ;  thefe  are  not  affefted 
by  the  kind  of  writing,  being  regulated  en 
tirely  by  the  fenfe.    But  as  the  cefural  and 
final  paufes  are  defigned  to  encreafe  the 
melody  of  verfc,  the  ftrictefl  attention  muft 
be  paid  to  them  in  reading.     They  mark 

a 


DISSERTATION     V.       311 

a  fufpenlion  of  voice  without  rifing  or  fall 
ing. 

To  read  profe  well  it  is  neceffary  to  under- 
ftand  what  is  read ;  and  to  read  poetry  well,  it 
is  further  necefTary  to  underftand  the  ftruo 
ture  of  verfe.  For  want  of  this  knowlege, 
moft  people  read  all  verfe  like  the  Iambic 
meafure.  The  following  are  pure  Iambics. 

"ABOVE  how  high  progrelfive  life  may  go  ! 
Around  how  wide,  how  deep  extend  below  !" 

IT  is  fo  eafy  to  lay  an  accent  on  every 
fecond  fyllable,  that  any  fchool  boy  can 
read  this  meafure  with  tolerable  propriety. 
But  the  misfortune  is,  that  when  a  habit 
of  reading  this  kind  of  meter  is  once  form 
ed,  perfons  do  not  vary  their  manner  to 
fuit  other  meafures.  Thus  in  reciting  the 
following  line, 

"  LOAD  the  tall  for/f,  and  launch  into  the  main/' 

many  people  would  lay  the  accent  on  ev 
ery  fecond  fyllable  ;  and  thus  read,  our 
poetry  becomes  the  moft  monotonous  and 
ridiculous  of  all  poetry  in  the  world. 

LET  the  following  line  be  repeated  with 
out  its  paufes,  and  it  lofes  its  principal 
beauty. 

*  BOJ,D,  as  a  hero,,  as  a  virgin,  mild." 

So 


3I2       DISSERTATION    V. 

So  in  the  following. 

^REASON,  the  card,,  but  paflion,  is  the  gale." 
"  FROM  ftorms,  a  fhelter3,  and  from  heat,  a  fhade." 

THE  harmony  is,  in  all  thefe  inftances, 
improved  much  by  the  femipaufes,  and  at 
the  fame  time  the  fenfe  is  more  clearly  un^ 
derftood, 

CONSIDERING  the  difficulty  of  reading 
verfe,  I  am  not  furprifed  to  find  but  few 
who  are  proficients  in  this  art.  A  knowL 
ege  of  the  ftrufture  of  verfe,  of  the  feveral 
kinds  of  feet,  of  the  nature  and  ufe  of  the 
final,  the  cefural  and  the  femicefural  paufes, 
is  efTential  to  a  graceful  manner  of  reading 
poetry;  and  even  this,  without  the  belt 
examples,  will  hardly  effeft  the  purpofe. 
It  is  for  this  reafon,  that  children  fhould 
not  be  permitted  to  read  poetry  of  the  more 
difficult  kind,  without  the  befl  examples 
for  them  to  imitate.  They  frequently 
contraft,  in  early  life,  either  a  monotony 
or  a  fing  fong  cant,  which,  when  grown 
into  a  habit,  is  feldom  ever  eradicated. 


NOTES, 


NOTES, 


HISTORICAL  AND  CRITICAL, 


[A,  page  42,  Text.] 

1  HE  author  of  the  "  Specimen  of  an  Ety-, 
mological  Vocabulary,"  aflerts  that  "  the  Celtic  was; 
demonftrably  the  origin  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  ;  of 
moft,  if  not  all  the  languages  of  Europe  j  of  part  of 
Africa  and  the  two  Tartaries," 

Mores.  Gebelin,  who  has,*with  great  induftry,  in- 
veftigated  the  origin  of  the  European  languages,  is  of 
opinion  that  the  Celtic  was  fpoken  from  the  borders  of 
the  Hellefpont  to  the  ocean,  and  from  Troy  to  Cape 
Finifterre  and  Ireland.  "  La  langue  Celtique,  dans 
fpn  fens  le  plus  extendu,  eft  la  langue  que  parlerent  les 
premiers  habitans  de  1'Europe,  depuis  les  rives  de  T~ 
Hellefpont  &  de  la  Mer  Egee,  jufques  a  celle  de  TO- 
cean  ;  depuis  le  cap  Sigee  aux  portes  de  Troie,  jufques 
au  cap  de  Finifterre  in  Portugal,  o.u  jufques  en  Ire« 
Jande." Dif.  Prelim,  art.  2. 

FROM  this  language,  he  fays,  fprung  the  Greek  or 
Felafgic,  prior  to  Hefiod  and  Homer — the  Latin  or  thai 

of 


3H        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

of  Numa— the  Etrufcan,  fpoken  in  a  confiderable  part 
of  Italy — the  Thracian,  fpoken  on  the  Danube,  from 
the  Euxine  to  the  Adriatic  fea,  which  was  the  fame  as 
the  Phrygian— the  Teutonic  or  German,  fpoken  from 
the  Viftula  to  the  Rhine — the  Gaulim,  fpoken  on  the 
Alps,  in  Italy,  on  this  fide  the  Po,  and  from  the  Rhine 
to  the  Ocean,  including  France,  the  Low  Countries, 
Switzerland,  Alemain,  and  the  two  Bretagnes — alfo 
the  Cantabrian,  or  ancient  language  of  Spain — in  (hort, 
the  Runic,  fpoken  in  the  North,  Denmark,  Sweden,  &c. 

THE  only  pure  remains  of  this  primitive  Celtic,  the 
fame  author  fuppofes,  are  found  in  Wales,  Cornwall, 
and  Brittany  in  France,  where  the  people  ftill  fpeak  di 
alects  of  a  language  which  is  proved  to  be  the  ancient 
liriuili. 

"SEPARES  ainfi  du  refte  de  1'univers,  ces  debris  des 
anciens  Celtes  ont  conferve  leurs  anciens  ufages,  &  par- 
lent  une  lanque  qui  n'a  aucun  rapport  a  celles  des  peu- 
ples  qui  les  ont  fubjugues,  &  qui  s'eft  partagee  en  trois 
dialedtes,  le  Gallois,  le  Cornouaillien,  &  le  Bas  Breton  ; 
dialectes  qui  ont  entr'eux  le  plus  grand  rapport,  &  qui 
font  inconteftablement  les  precicux  relies  de  I'ancienne, 
Jangue  des  Celtes  ou  des  Gaukns." Dif.  Prelim. 

"SEPARATED  from  the  reft  of  the  world,  thefe  re 
mains  of  the  ancient  Celts  have  preferved  their  ancient 
cuftoms,  and  fpeak  a  language  which  has  no  agreement 
I'jith  thojf  of  their  conquerors,  and  which  is  divided  into 
three  dialects,  the  Wei (h,  the  Cornim,  and  theArmor- 
jc — dialects  which  have  a  clofe  affinity  with  each  oth 
er,  and  which  are,  beyond  difpute,  the  precious  remains 
of  the  ancient  Celtic  or  Gaulim  language."* 

IN  this  pafTage  the  author  feems  to  contradict  what 
he  had  jult  before  advanced,  that  the  Celtic  was  the 

primitive 

*  IT  Is  fa;d  that  the  Celtic  has  a  graat  affinity  with  _the  oriental  lan 
guages.  "  Magnam  certe  cum  linguis  orientalibus  affinitatem  recinet, 
uc  notant  Dr.  I.  Divies  pafnm  in  Difttoftario  fuo  Cambro  Britannicc, 
et  ^aojuei  Uocliartus  in  fua  Geographica  facra,"— — Wallis, 


AND    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L.  ,          315 

primitive  language  of  Europe,  from  which  fprung  the 
Gothic  or  German.  Now  the  Franks,  Normans  and 
Saxons,  who  fubdued  Gaul  and  Britain,  fpoke  dialers 
of  the  Gothic  ;  confequently  there  muft  have  been,  up 
on  our  author's  own  hypothefis,  fome  agreement  be 
tween  the  ancient  Celtic  and  the  more  modern  lan 
guages  of  the  Goths,  Saxons,  and  other  northern  con 
querors  of  the  Celtic  nations.  This  agreement  will  ap 
pear,  when  I  come  to  collate  a  number  of  words  in  the 
different  languages. 

MANY  learned  men  have  attempted  to  prove  that 
the  Northern  Goths  and  Teutones,  and  the  Celts  who 
lived  in  Gaul  and  Britain,  were  originally  the  fame  peo 
ple.  Monf.  Mallet,  the  celebrated  hiftorian,  has  com- 
pofed  his  "  Introduction  to  the  Hiftory  of  Denmark." 
upon  this  hypothefis.  His  tranilator  is  of  a  differ 
ent  opinion,  and  has  generally  fubilituted  the  Englifh 
word  "  Gothic"  for  the  "  Celtique"  of  the  original.  In 
a  preface  to  his  tranilation,  he  endeavors  to  confute  the 
opinion  of  Monf.  Mallet,  Cluverius,  Pellutier  and  oth 
ers,  and  prove  that  the  Gothic  and  Celtique  nations 
were  ab  origine  two  diflincl  races  of  men.  Great  eru 
dition  is  difplayed  on  both  fides  of  the  queftion,  and 
thofe  who  have  a  tafte  for  enquiries  of  this  kind,  will 
receive  much  fatisfaclion  and  improvement,  in  reading 
\vhat  thefe  authors  have  written  upon  the  fubjecl:. 

AFTER  a  clofe  examination,  I  freely  declare  myfelf 
an  advocate  for  the  opinion  of  Monf.  Maliet,  Lhuyd, 
and  Pellutier,  who  fuppofe  the  Celts  and  Goths  to  be 
defcended  from  the  fame  original  ftoclc.  The  lepara- 
tion  however  muft  have  been  very  early,  and  probably 
as  early  as  the  firll  age  after  the  flood.  To  fay  that 
the  Gothic  and  Celtique  languages  have  no  affinity^ 
would  be  to  contradidt  the  moft  poiitive  proofs  ;  yet  the 
affinity  is  very  fmall — difcoverable  only  in  a  few  words. 

THE  modern  Englim,  Danifh,  Swedifn  and  German 
are  all  unqueftionably  derived  from  the  fame  language  ; 

they 


3*6        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

they  have  been  fpoken  by  diftinct  tribes,  probably  not 
two  thoufand  years,  and  almoft  one  half  of  that  period, 
the  founds  have  been  in  fome  meafure  fixed  by  written 
characters,  yet  the  languages  are  become  fo  different 
as  to  be  unintelligible,  each  to  thofe  who  fpeak  the  oth 
er.  But,  fuppofe  two  languages  feparated  from  the  pa 
rent  tongue,  two  thoufand  years  earlier,  and  to  be  fpok- 
en,  thro  the  whole  of  that  time,  by  rude  nations,  unac 
quainted  with  writing,  and  perpetually  roving  in  for- 
cits,  changing  their  residence,  and  liable  to  petty  con- 
quefts,  and  it  is  natural  to  think  their  affinity  muft  be 
come  extremely  obfcure.  This  feems  to  have  been  the 
t'aft  with  refpe6t  to  the  Gothic  and  Celtic  tongues. 
The  common  parent  of  both  was  the  Phenician  or  He 
brew.  This  affertion  is  not  made  on  the  fole  authori 
ty  of  Mofes  ;  profane  hiftory  and  etymology  fusnifh 
itrong  arguments  to  prove  the  truth  of  the  fcripture  ac- 
£ourit  of  the  manner  in  which  the  world  was  peopled 
from  one  ftock  or  family.  Of  thefe  two  ancient  lan 
guages,  the  Celtic  or  Britifh  comes  the  neareft  to  the 
Hebrew,  for  which  perhaps  fubftantial  reafons  will  be 
aiTigned.  The  Gothic  bears  a  greater  affinity  to  the 
Greek  and  Roman,  as  being  derived  through  the  an 
cient  Ionic  or  Pelafgic,  from  the  Phenician. 

LHUYD,  a  celebrated  and  profound  antiquary,  re 
marks,  Arch.  Brit,  page  35.  "It  is  a  common  error 
in  etymology  to  endeavor  the  deriving  all  the  radical 
words  of  our  weftern  European  languages  from  the 
Latin  and  Greek  ;  or  indeed  to  derive  constantly  the 
primitives  of  any  one  language  from  any  particular 
tongue.  When  we  do  this,  we  feem  to  forget  that  all 
have  been  fubject  to  alterations  ;  and  that  the  greater 
and  more  poiite  any  nation  is,  the  more  1  abject,  (partly 
for  improvement,  and  partly  out  of  a  luxurious  wan- 
tonncfs)  to  new  model  their  language.  We  muft 
therefore  neceflarily  allow,  that  whatever  nations  were 
of  the  neighborhood  and  of  one  common  origin  with 
flic  Greeks  and  Latins,  when  they  began  to  diftinguifh 
thcinielvcs  for  politcucfs,  they  muft  have  preferved  their 

languages 


AND    CRITICAL.  377 

languages  (-which  could  differ  from  theirs  only  in  dia- 
lech)  much  better  than  they  ;  and  confequently  no  ab- 
furdity  to  fuppofe  a  great  many  words  of  the  language, 
fpoken  by  the  old  aborigines,  the  Ofci,  the  Lseitrigones, 
the  Aufonians,  ^Enotrians,  Umbrians  and  Sabines,  out 
of  which  the  Latin  was  compofed,  to  have  been  better 
preferved  in  the  Celtic  than  in  the  Roman.  "Lingua 
Hetrufca,  Phrygia,  Celtica  (fays  the  learned  Stiernhdm) 
affines  funt  omnes  $  ex  uno  fonte  derivatas.  Nee 
Grseca  longe  diftat,  Japheticae  funt  ornnes  ;  ergo  et 
ipfa  Latina.  Non  igitur  mirium  eft  innumera  vocab- 
ula  dictarum  Linguarum  communia  elfe  cum  Latinis." 
And  that  being  granted,  it  muft  alfo  be  allowed  that  ths 
Celtic  (as  well  as  all  other  languages)  has  been  heft  pre 
ferved  by  fuch  of  their  colonies,  as,  from  the  fituation 
of  their  country,  have  been  the  leaft  fubjefi  to  ^v reign 
invasions.  Whence  it  proceeds  that  we  always  nnd  the 
ancient  languages  are  befl  retained  in  mountains  and 
iilands," 

THE  refult  of  this  doftrine  is,  that  the  primitive  Cel 
tic  was  preferved,  in  greateft  purity,  in  Britain,  before 
the  Roman  and  Saxon  conquefts,  and  fmce  thofe  peri-^ 
ods,  in  V/ales  and  Cornwall.  Hence  the  affinity  be 
tween  the  Hebrew  and  Briti(h3  which  will  afterward 
appear. 

WALIIS  remarks  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  many 
"words  in  the  Englim  and  German  languages  are  de 
rived  from  the  Latin,  or  the  Latin  from  the  Teutonic, 
or  whether  all  were  derived  from  the  fame  ftock..  "  Mu!- 
tas  autem  voces,  quae  nobis  cum  Germanis  fere  funf 
communes,  dubium  eft  an  prifci  dim  Tcutones  a  Ln- 
tinis,  an  hi  ab  illis,  aut  denique  utrique  ab  eodem  com 
mune  fonte,  acceperint." »Gram.  Cap.  14. 

BUT  I  prefume  that  hiftory,  as  well  as  etymology, 
will  go  far  in  foiving  the  doubt,  and  incline  us  to  be 
lieve  that  the  Teutonic,  Greek  and  Latin  were  all  chil 
dren  of  the  fame  parent  tongue. 

WE 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

WE  firft  hear  of  men  in  the  mild  climate  of  Afia 
Minor,  and  about  the  head  of  the  Mediterranean. 
Soon  after  the  flood,  the  inhabitants  began  to  migrate 
into  diftant  countries.  Some  of  them  went  northward 
and  fettled  in  Baftriania  and  Hyrcania,  thence  extend 
ing  weftward  along  the  mores  of  the  Cafpian  fea  into 
Armenia,  From  thefe  Afiatic  colonies,  fprung  the 
Scythians  and  the  numerous  tribes  that  afterwards  cov 
ered  the  territory  of  modern  Ruflia,  Sweden  and  Den 
mark.  The  different  tribes  or  hords  of  thefe  people 
were  called  Cimbri,  (perhaps  from  Gomer)  Galli,  Um- 
bri,  &c.  and  fettled  the  northern  parts  of  Europe  as  far 
as  the  Rhine, 

THE  northern  Greek  countries,  Thrace  and  Myfia, 
were  Copied  by  the  defendants  of  llras  or  Thiras,  a 
fon  of  Japhet.  The  whole  country  from  Thrace  to 
Peloponneius  was  inhabited  by  the  posterity  of  Javan  and 
Cittim  ;  indeed  Ionia,  the  ancient  name  of  Greece, 
feems  to  be  derived  from  Javan,  J  or  /  being  ancient 
ly  pronounced  as  liquid  /,  or  y  confonant,  and  as  it  is 
itill  pronounced  in  the,German^,  yaw.  Thefe  fettle- 
ments  were  made  long  before  the  Pelafgic  migrations 
into  Greece,  which  happened  at  lead  2000  years  before 
Chrift.  The  original  language  of  Greece  was  called 
Ionic,  from  Javan  or  Ion.  The  Pelafgi  were  probably 
Phenicians  ;  and  ancient  hiftorians  relate  that  they  car 
ried  letters  into  Greece  ;  but  thefe  muft  have  been  in  a 
very  rude  ftate,  fo  early  after  their  invention  ;*  nor  do 
we  find  that  they  were  ever  much  ufed  ;  at  leaft  no  rec 
ords  or  infcriptions,  in  thefe  characters,  are  mentioned 
by  the  Greek  hiftorians. 

CADMUS  introduced  the  Phenician  letters  into 
Greece  1494  years  before  Chrift.  Thefe  letters  were 
introduced  with  fome  difficulty,  and  both  Cadmus  and 
his  followers  were  obliged  to  adopt  the  Ionic  or  original 

Japhetic 

*  THJE  inveritioii  of  letters  is  afcribed  to  Taaut  or  Theuth,  the  fon  of 
Mifraimt  foon  after  the  flood. 


A  N  fc    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L.  3*9 

Japhetic  language,  which  was  afterwards  written  in  his 
fhenician  characters. 

THE  Greeks,  at  different  periods,  fent  colonies  into 
diftant  parts  of  the  country.  Thefe  fettled  in  Thrace, 
Macedon,  on  the  banks  of  the  Euxine,  in  Alia  Minor, 
in  Italy,  Sicily  and  on  the  fouthern  fhore  of  the  Medi 
terranean.  This  Ionic  or  Japhetic  language  was  there 
fore  the  root  of  the  Greek  and  Latin.  It  was  alfo  the 
root  of  the  Gothic  language,  fpoken  in  the  north  of 
Europe  ;  and  from  which,  after  the  revolution  of  ages, 
the  (hocks  of  war,  and  the  improvements  in  fcience,  no 
lefs  than  feven  or  eight  different  languages  are  derived.* 

PROFANE  hiftory  therefore  warrants  us  in  averting 
that  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  all  the  modern  languages 
of  the  north  of  Europe,  and  the  Englim,  among  the 
reft,  had  a  common  ftock.  But  hiftory  alone  would 
not  filence  our  objections  to  this  theory,  were  it  not  in- 
conteftibly  proved  by  a  number  of  radical  words,  com 
mon  to  all,  which  are  not  yet  loft  in  the  changes  of 
time.  Etymology  therefore  furni  fh.es  a  demonftration 
of  what  is  related  in  hiftory.  When  one  fees  the  words 
yivurxu  and  yvou  in  Greek,  nofco^  and  anciently,  gnoj'co 
in  Latin,  and  know  in  Englifh,  conveying  the  fame  idea, 
he  is  led  to  fufpecl:  that  one  nation  borrowed  the  word 
from  another.  But  when  did  the  Englifh  borrow  this 
word  ?  The  word  was  ufed  by  the  Saxons,  long  before 
they  could  have  had  any  knowlege  of  Greek  or  Ro 
man  authors.  It  furnifhes  therefore  a  ftrong  prefump- 
tion  that  all  the  ftreams  came  from  the  fame  fountain. 
But  when  we  examin  further,  and  find  many,  perhaps 
a  hundred  words  or  more,  common  to  all  thefe  lan 
guages,  the  evidence  of  their  common  origin  becomes 
irreiiftible.  This  in  fact  is  the  cafe. 

THE  authors  then  who  have  labored  to  prove  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Languages  to  be  derived  from  the 


*  I  STKONCLY  fufpeft  thnt  the  primitive  language  of  the  north  of 
Europe  was  the  root  of"  rhe  Sclavonic,  ftiil  reeained  in  Kullia.  Poland., 
Hungary  &e.  fcni  that  the  Gociiic  was  introduced  at  a  later  pr./.nj, 


320        NOTE  3,    HISTORICAL 

Celtic,  miftake  the  truth.  The  Celtic  was  not  prior  to 
the  Greek  and  Latin,  but  a  branch  of  \htfamejtock  j 
that  is,  cotemporary  with  thofe  languages. 

THIS  Japhetic  language,  I  take  to  be  coeval  with  the 
Phenician  or  Hebrew  ;  and  there  are  fame  Hebrew 
words  in  the  Engliih  language,  which  muft  have  been 
derived  thro  the  Saxon  or  Teutonic.  But  the  old 
Britifh,  as  I  before  remarked,  retained  the  gfeateft  affin 
ity  to  the  Hebrew.  The  reafon  which  appears  proba 
ble,  has  been  already  affigned  ;  the  Celts  and  Britons 
in  the  weft  of  Europe,  remained,"till  the  times  of  Juli 
us  Caefar,  lefs  difturbed  by  wars  and  revolutions,  than 
the  inhabitants  of  Afia,  Egypt  and  Greece. 

BUT  I  am  inclined  to  believe  further,  that  the  de- 
fcent  of  the  Britons  from  the  firft  Japhetic  tribes  that 
fettled  in  Greece,  was  more  direct,  than  thro  the  Go- 
in  erians  or  Cimbri,  who  travelled  northward  along  the 
Chores  of  the  Baltic.  I  fufpecT:  that  very  ancient  colo 
nies  fettled  on  the  ihores  of  the  Mediterranean,  in  Italy 
and  Spain,  and  thence  found  their  way  to  Gaul  and 
Britain,  before  the  northern  tribes  arrived  thro  Germa 
ny  and  Belgium.  This  wo'uld  account  for  the  affinity 
between  the  Hebrew  language  and  the  Welfh.  The 
opinion  however  is  not  well  fupported  by  hiftorical 
fads,  and  the  ancient  name  of  the  Britim  language, 
Cymraeg)  denoting  its  defcent  from  the  Cnnbric  is  a 
vveighty  objection.* 

IT  is  certain  however  that  Carthage  was  fettled  by 
Phenicians,  about  900-  years  before  Chrift.  Greek 
colo'nies  went  thither  in  the  following  century,  and  not 
long  after  they  fettled  at  Marfeilles  in  Gaul.  The  peo 
ple  therefore  on  both  fhores  of  the  Mediterranean  were* 
dcfcended  from  the  fame  flock  as  the  northern  nations. 

Accordingly 

*  THIS  obje'tiitfh  however  may  be  obviated  by  Lluyd's  fuppolitbn, 
rnentioncd  in  the  note,  page  50,  that  the  primitive  inhabitants  ot  Brit 
ain  were  denominated  Gaydeliarrs,  and  theCymri  or  Welfh  were  amrh- 
er  branch  of  the  Celtic  Cimbri,  who  came  from  the  North,  i'suka  •.;• 
Britain  and  gave  a* me  to  the  language. 


AND    CRITICAL.  321 

Accordingly  we  are  not  furprized  to  find  fome  radical 
words  nearly  the  fame  in  all  the  exifting  languages  of 
Europe.  See  Jackfon's  Chronological  Antiquities, 
vol.  3,  with  Lhuyd,  Geblin,  and  others. 

To  illuftrate  what  I  have  advanced^  reflecting  the 
firft  peopling  of  the  world,  and  the  derivation  of  moft 
European  languages  from  one  mother  tongue,  I  will 
here  infert  fome  remarks  from  Rowland's  Mona  Anti- 
qua  Reftaurata,  p.  261,  with  a  table  of  words,  evident 
ly  of  Hebrew  original. 

tc  A  TABLE,  jhewing  the  Affinity  and  near  Refemblance9 
both  in  Sound  and  Signification^  of  many  Words  of  the 
Ancient  Languages  of  Europe  with  the  Original  Hebrew 
Tongue. 

"  FOR  the  better  underftanding  of  the  parallels  of 
this  following  table,  it  is  to  be  obierved,  that  letters  of 
one  and  the  fame  organ  are  of  common  ufe  in  the  pro 
nunciation  of  words  of  different  languages— as  for  ex 
ample,  My  B,  V^  jP,  P,  are  labials  :  T',  Z>,  S,  are  den 
tals  :  G,  Chj  H,  K^  C,  are  gutturals—and  therefore  if 
the  Hebrew  word  or  found  begins  with,  or  is  made  of, 
any  one  of  the  labials,  any  of  the  reft  of  the  fame  or- 

tan  will  anfwer  it  in  the  derivative  languages.  The 
tine  is  to  be  obferved  in  ufing  the  dental  and  the  gut 
tural  letters.  For  in  tracing  out  the  origin  of  words, 
we  are  more  to  regard  the  found  of  them  than  their  lit 
eral  form  and  compofition  ;  wherein  we  find  words 
very  often,  by  the  humors  and  fancy  of  people,  tranf- 
pofed  and  altered  from  their  native  founds,  and  yet  in 
their  fignification  they  very  well  fit  their  original  pat 
terns.  I  (hall  only  exemplify  in  the  letters  M,  By  and 
V,  which  are  of  one  organ,  that  is,  are  formed  by  one 
inftrument,  the  lip ;  and  therefore  are  promifcuoufly 
ufed  the  one  for  the  other,  in  pronouncing  words  of  one 
language  in  another.  The  Hebrew  B  is  generally  pro 
nounced  as  a  /^corifonant.  And  the  Iri(h  alfo,  moft 
commonly  in  the  middle  of  a  word,  pronounce  M  as  a 
W  7- 


322      NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


P;  as  we  find  the  ancient  Britons  to  have  made  ufe  of 
F,  or  rather  F,  which  they  pronounce  as  ^  for  M  and 
B  in  many  Latin  words  ;  as, 


BRITISH. 

Nlfer 
Colo/ft 
Gefeill 
Rhufain 
Scrifenu 
ilyfr 
Rhwyf 
Dofi 
Rhyfela 
Pluf 
Cadfan 
Dyfed 
Llif 
&c, 


LATIN. 

BRITISH. 

LATIN. 

Animal 

Anifail 

Numerus 

TTurma 

Tyrfa 

Columna 

Terminus 

Terfyn 

Gemelli 

Calamus 

Calaf 

Roma 

Prhrtui 

Pnf 

Scribo 

Arnnis 

Afon 

Liber 

Arma 

Arfau 

Remus 

Firmus 

Pfyrf 

Domo 

Monumcntum 
Flrmomentum 

Monfent 
Pfurfafen 

Rebello 
Pluma 

Lamentor 

Llefain 

Catamanus 

Elementum 

Elfen 

Dirneta 

Memorare 

Myfyrio 

Lima 

Hyems 

Gauaf 

Lamina 

Clamare 

Llafaru 

"  WE  are  not  to  wonder  at  this  analogy  of  founds  in 
the  primitive  diftirtction  of  languages.  For  before  the 
ufe  of  writing,  which  has  eftablimed  the  correct  form 
of  words,  people  were  only  guided  by  the  ear  in  taking 
the  found  of  words,  and  they  pronounced  and  uttered 
them  again  as  the  organs  of  their  voice  were  bert  fitted 
for  it  ;  and  it  happening  that  the  aptitude  and  difpofi- 
tion  of  thofe  organs,  peculiar  to  fome  people  and  coun 
tries,  were  various  (as  we  fincl  to  this  day  fome  nations 
cannot  fhape  their  voice  to  exprefs  all  the  founds  of  an 
other's  tongue,)  it  accordingly  affected  and  inclined 
fome  parties  of  people  to  fpeak  the  fame  confonants 
harder  or  fofter,  to  utter  the  fame  vowels  broader  or 
narrower,  longer  or  fliorter,  as  they  found  themfelves 
beft  difpofed  to  do.  And  thereupon  cuftom  prevailing 
tvith  particular  fets  of  people,  to  continue  the  ufe  of 
fuch  different  pronunciation  as  they  affected,  the  words 
fo  varied  came  at  length  to  take  on  them  different  forms, 

and 


AND    CRITICAL. 


snd  to  be  efteemed  and  taken  as  parts  of  different  lan 
guages,  tho  in  their  origin  they  were  one  and  the  fame.* 


Hebrew. 

Derivatives. 

Engtijh. 

"AUCH 

Awch 

Brit. 

The  edge  of  a  fword 

Even 

Maen 

A  ftone 

Agam    or 
Leagam 

Lagam 

Corn. 

A  pool  or  lake 

Ivah 

Deis-yfu 

Br. 

To  defire 

Auor 

Awyr 

Ivightned  air 

Ano 

Yno 

Then 

Achei 

Achau 

Brethren  or  kindred 

Aedenei 

Gwadnaii 

Thefoles  of  the  feet 

Calal 

Cyllell 

To  wound  or  pierce 

Domen 

Tomen, 

Muek  or  dung 

Gehel 

_ 

Coal 

Sal 

Sal 

Br. 

Vile  or  of  no  account 

Kndal 

Gadael 

To  forfalce  or  defift 

Aggan 

Angeion 

'Greek 

A  veflel  or  earthen  pot 

Alaph 

'Alpha 

To  find 

Bama 

Bomos 

An  altar 

Hag 

Agios 

Holy 

Hadar 

C  Cadair 
1  Katha 

Br. 

Irijb 

Honor  or  reverence 

Hia 

Yhi 

Br. 

She 

Goph 

Corph 

A  body,  corpfe 

Deraich 

J  Braich 
I  Raich 

An  arm 

Dad 


*  IT  is  commonly  dbferved,  that  different  climates,  airs  and  aliments^ 
do  very  much  diverlify  the  tone  of  the  parts  and  mufcles  of  human  bod 
ies  ;  on  fome  of  which  the  modulation  of  the  voice  much  depends.  The 
peculiar  moifture  of  one  country,  the  drought  of  another  (other  caufes 
from  food,  Sec.  concurring)  extend  or  contract,  fwell  or  attenuate,  the 
organs  of  the  voice^  that  the  found  made  thereby  is  rendered  either  fhriil 
or  hoarfe,  foft  or  hard,  plain  or  lifping,  in  proportion  to  that  contraction 
or  extension.  And  hence  it  is,  that  the  Chinefe  and  Tartars  have 
fome  founds  in  their  language,  that  Europeans  can  Icarcely  imitate  : 
And  it  is  well  known  in  Europe  itfelf,  that  an  Englishman  is  noc 
able  agreeably  to  converfs  with  a  ftranger,  even  in  one  and  the  fame 
Latin  j  nay,  even  in  England,  it  is  noted  by  Mr.  Camden  and  Dr.  Full- 
t-T,  that  the  natives  of  Carleton  Curlew  in  Lekefterfhire,  by  a  ceT^.;.n 
peculiarity  of  the  place,  have  the  turn  of  their  voice  very  different  ftom 
:hofe  of  the  neighboring  villages. 
W  2 


324      NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


Hebrew,         Derivatives. 


Englijb. 


Dad 

Diden 

Er. 

The  dug  or  udder 

Ager 

Aggero 

Lat. 

To  heap  together 

Elah 

-Illi,  fflafe 

They,  mafc.  &fenr. 

Angil 

Axilla 

The  arm  pit 

Dapfh 

Daps 

Cheer  or  dainties 

Hen 

En  !  ecce  ! 

Lo  !  behold  ! 

Phar 

Phero 

Greek 

To  bear  or  carry 

Harabon 

Arrhabon 

A  pawn  or  pledge 

Phalat 

Phulatto 

To  keep  or  defend 

Pathak 

Peitho 

To  perfuade 

Gab 

Gibbus 

Lat. 

Bent  or  crooked 

Dur 

Duro 

To  endure 

Laifh 

Lis 

Greek 

A  lion 

Deka 

Deko 

To  bite 

Ephach 

Ophis 

A  ferpent 

Dath 

Deddf 

Br. 

A  law 

Denah 

Dyna 

This,  that,  there  k  is 

Hiflah 

J  Ys  taw 
I  Diflaw 

Be  Client 

Cala 

Claf 

To  be  fick 

Clei 

Cleas 

Irijh 

Jewels,  ornaments 

Devar 

Deveirim 

To  fpeak 

Ein 

Ynys 

Br. 

Ifland 

f  A  man    Armor. 

Hama 

iYmenyn 

Br. 

Butter 

Im 

Irijh 

Ivo 

Nava 

His  enemy 

Beala 

Mealam 

To  be  wafted 

Vock 

C  Vacuus 
|Gwac 

Lai. 
Br. 

Empty 

Aita 

Ydyw 

Is,  or  are 

Bar 

Bar 

Irijh 

Son 

Bareh 

Bara 

Br. 

Meat,  or  visuals 

Beram 

Verutn 

Lat. 

But,  neverthelefs 

Beth 

Bwth 

Br. 

A  houfe,  booth 

S* 

She 

Irijb 

He,  or  him 

Gaha 

lachau 

Br. 

To  heal,  or  cure 

Gad 

Cad 

An  army 

Botei* 

A  N  x>    CRITICAL. 


3*3 


Hebrew.         Derivatives. 


Boten 

Potten 

Gever 

Gwr 

Hada 

Edo 

Boa 

Bad 

Aniah 

Ama 

Charath 

Charatto 

Maas 

Mifeo 

Semain 

Semaino 

Aaz 

'Aix 

AJeth 

Alaeth 

Elil 

Ellylly 

Allun 

Llwyn 

Amunath 

Amynedd 

Ap 

Wep 

Itho 

Iddo 

Atun 

Odyn 

Atha 

Aeth 

Ifche 

Yflii 

Emaeth 

Ymaith 

Barach 

Parch 

Gobah 

Coppa 

Geven 

Cefrf 

Gedad 

Gwiwdod 

Gaiaph 

Cau 

Evil 

, 

Bcafch 

~ 

Babel 


Baroth 

Gaak 

Dum 

Dufch 

Hebifch 

Hua 

Haras 


W 


Englljh. 

Br.    The  belly 

A  man 

Greek  To  cherifh 
To  come 
Sadnefs 
To  infculp 
I  hate 
I  fhew 
A  goat 
Br.   A  curfe 
Idol 

A  grove  of  oaks 
Conftancy 
Face 

With  him 
A  furnace 
Went,  or  came 
To  burn 
From  him 
To  efteem,  or  blefs 
The  top 
A  ridge,  or  back 
Excellency 
To  (hut,  or  inclofe 
Evil 
Bafe 
To  babble,  cabal ;  and 

hablar  in  Spanifh,  to 

fpeak  ;  Lat.  fabula  ; 

Fr.    fariboles,    idle 

talk 
Broth 
Gay 
Dumb 
Todafh 
To  abafh 
He,  mafc.  gend. 
To  harafs 

Ghittah 


3z6        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


Hebrew. 


Derivatives*. 


Engli/h. 


Chittah 

. 

Wheat 

Mefurah 

. 

A  meafure 

Sahap 



To  fweep 

Charath 



To  write 

Saar 

. 

A  fhower 

Aanna 

.  

To  annoy 

Phaser 

• 

Fair 

Pheret 



A  part,  or  portion 

Pliaerek 

_. 

Fierce 

Eretz 



Earth;  Sax.  hertha 

Sad 

. 

Side 

Spor 



A  fparrow 

Kinneh 

. 

A  cane 

Kera 

—  ;  — 

To  cry 

Shekel 

• 

Skill 

Rechus 



Riches 

Kre 

. 

A  crow 

Pafa 

—  _ 

To  pafs 

Halal 

• 

A  hole 

Catat 



To  cut 

Rages 

,  —  . 

To  rage 

Ragal 

_ 

To  rail,  or  detract 

Maguur 
Madhevi 

Magwyr 
Myddfai 

Habitation 
Diftempers 

Doroth 

Toreth 

Generations,  encreafe 

Dal 

Tai 

Tail  and  high 

Havah 

Yfu 

Was,  or  has  been 

Mahalac 

Male 

A  pathway,  or  a  balk 

Hilo 

Heulo 

Shining.     Jpollo,  S&L 

Tor 

C  Toar         Irijb. 
I  Terfyn        JSr. 

A  boundary,  or  limit 

Siu 

Syw 

Refplendent 

Achalas 

Achles 

Defence,  Achilles 

f  Machno 

Places  of  defence  of  old 

Machaneh 

<       and 

in  the  co.  of  Mont 

I  Mechain 

gomery.  Penmachno 

•Chprau 

Crau 

Holes 

%      '  *- 

Chcrefh 

AND    CRITICAL. 


3*7 


Hebrew* 

Derivatives.  * 

Englijh. 

Chorefh 

Cors               Br. 

A  place  full  of  fmall 
wood  or  reeds 

Nodah 

Nodi 

To  make  known,  or 
note 

Jadha 

5  Addef 
i  'Oida       Greek 

To  know 

Hathorath 

Athrawiaeth   Br. 

Difcipline 

Jch 

Eich 

Your,  or  your  own 

Jared 

I  wared 

Defcended 

Cha 

Chwi 

You 

Jain 

Gwin 

Wine 

Toledouth 

Tylwyth 

Generations 

Lus 

Llyfu 

To  go  away,  or  avoid 

Caolath 

Colled 

Alofs 

Hounil 

Ynnill 

Gain 

Jefter 

Yftyr 

Confideration 

Jadadh 

Gwahodd 

To  invite 

Cafodoth 

Cyfoeth 

Honours,  or  wealth 

Cis 

Cift 

Ached 

Bar 

J  Far             lat. 
i  Bara            Br. 

Bread  corn 

Shevah 

.    ,    . 

Seven 

Dakar 

A^  dagger 

Hinnek 

.  „  .... 

To  hang 

Shelet 

-T-        -          a 

A  fhield 

Hever 

_ 

Over,  or  above 

Shibbar 



To  fhiver,  or  quake 

Jiled 

i 

*A  child 

Choebel 

- 

A  cable 

Parak 

—  .-. 

To  break 

Gannaf 

, 

A  knave,  or  a  thief 

Coll 

.1 

All 

Hannah 

,  

To  annoy,  or  hurt 

Eth 

J  Etos          Greek 
1  ^Etas          Lat. 

A  year,  or  age 

San 

Coena 

A  fupper 

Nabal 

Nebulo 

A  churl 

Mot 

*  JUD  leka,  thou  art  my  fon.    Pfalm  ii.  7. 

325       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


Hebrew.         Derivatives. 


Mot 

Motus          Lot. 

Bath 

Batos           Greek 

Eden 

Edone 

Kolah 

Kleio 

Sas 

Ses 

Phac 

Phake 

Skopac 

Scopo 

Jounec 

Jevangc          Br. 

Hamohad 

Am  mod 

Parad 

Pared 

Keren 

Corn 

Kefci 

Cefail 

Me-Ab 

Mab 

Luung 

Llyngcu 

Temutha 

Difetha 

Ceremluach 

Cromlech 

Hamule 

Ami 

Mah  ? 

Mae? 

Magal 

Maglu 

Makel 

Magi 

Meria 

Mer 

Mout 

Mudo 

Meth 

Methu 

Mar 

Maer 

Marad 

Brad 

Nafe 

Nef 

Taphilu 

Taflu 

Hanes 

Hanes 

Nevath 

Neuadd 

JifTal 

Ifel  or  Ifelu 

Naoaph 

Nvvyf 

Nadu 

Nadu 

Sethar 

Sathru 

Heber 

Aber 

IN  ucchu 

Nychu 

Nuu 

Nhwy 

Naodhad 

Nodded 

Englljk. 

Motion 

A  thorn 

Pleafure 

To  praife 

A  moth 

Lentil 

To  fpeculatQ 

A  fuckling 

Covenant 

A  partition 

A  horn 

The  armpit 

Son,  or  from  a  father 

To  fwallow 

Peftru&ion 

A  facrincing  ftone 

Plenty,  or  fiore 

What  ?  where  ?  how  ? 

To  betray 

Aftaff. 

Fat,  or  rnarrow 

To  remove 

To  die,  or  fail 

A  lord 

*  Rebellion 

Joyful 

To  caft 

To  fignify 

Habitation 

To  throw  down 

Luft 

They  moan 

To  throw  under  fee$ 

A  ford,  or  paflage 

Being  imitten 

They,  or  thofe 

To  efcape 

Gadah 


*  MEREDUTII  is  the  fame  with  Mfrad,  a  Britift  name. 


AND      C   R  I  T 

1  C  A  L.             329 

Helreiv 

,         Derivatives. 

Englijk. 

Gadah 

Gadaw           Br. 

To  pafs  by 

Niued. 

Niweid. 

Tofpoil 

Goloth 

Golwyth 

Burnt  offerings 

Mohal 

Moel 

Top  of  a  hill 

Galas 

Glwys 

Pleafaat 

Hafern 

Afen 

A  rib,  or  bons 

Garevath 

Gwarth. 

Shame 

Taphug 

Diffyg 

Want,  or  defecT: 

Phoreth 

Ffrwyth 

Fruit,  or  effe£t 

Pach 

Bach 

A  crooked  flick 

Pinnouth 

Pennaeth 

Chief,  or  uppermoft 

Phinnah 

Ffynnu 

To  profper 

Path 

Peth 

A  part  or  portion 

Phiiegefli 

Ffiloges 

A  concubine 

Caton 

Cwttyn 

Short  and  little 

Cir 

Caer 

A  walled  town 

Reith 

Rhith 

Appearance 

Tireneh 

Trin 

To  feed  and  look  after 

Ragah 

Rhwygo 

To  tear,  rag 

Rafah 

Ras  and  Rhad 

Grace,  or  good  will 

Semen 

Saim 

Fat,  or  oil 

Saraph 

Sarph 

A  ferpent 

Sac 

.    Sach 

A  *fack 

Phuk 

VFfug 
\  Fucus        l,at. 

Difguife 

Phaerek 

Ferocia 

Fiercenefs 

Pinnah 

Pinna 

Battlement 

Pigger 

Piger  fuit 

Lazy 

Naca 

Neco 

To  Hay 

Ad 

Ad 

Unto 

Nut 

Nuto 

To  nod 

Parag    » 

Trecho        Greek 

To  run  to,  or  come  at 

Bala 

Palai 

Some  time  ago 

Hannak 

J  'Agcho 
1  Tagu           Br. 

To  ftrangle 

Naar 

Nearos         Greek 

New  or  lately 

Agab 

i  'Agapao 

To  love 

Pacha 

*  IT  hag 

thJ3  found  In  mo£  of  the  ancient  tongues. 

330       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


Hebrew. 

Derivatives. 

Englijh. 

Pacha 

Pege             Greek 

A  fountain 

Parafh 

Phrafo 

To  declare,  phrafe 

Kol 

Kale6G.Galw5. 

To  call 

Mafhal 

Bafileuo       Greek 

To  reign 

Shareka 

Syrinx 

A  fyringe 

Bekarim 

Pecora           Lat. 

Cattle 

Ahel 

Aula 

A  hall 

Carpas 

Carbafus 

Fine  linen,  or  lawn 

./Em 

./Eftes  La.TesBr. 

Heat,  or  hot  weather 

Gibar 

Guberno       Lat. 

To  govern 

Parah 

Vireo 

To  look  green 

Ki 

Quia 

Wherefore 

Glam 

Glim 

Of  old 

Golem 

Glomus 

A  clew  of  thread 

Amam 

Ymam 

Mother,  mamma 

Coaphar 

Gwobr 

Reward 

Cala 

Caula             Lat. 

A  meepfold 

Sarch 

Serch               Br. 

Luftfui 

Goliath 

Glwth 

Abed 

Pathehen 

Puttain 

A  whore 

Burgad 

Bwrgais 

A  burgefs 

Terag 

Drwg 

Bad,  or  evil 

Dafgar 

Dyfgl 

Adifh 

Shiovang 

Siongc 

Honorable 

Anas 

Annos 

To  inftigate 

Tarn 

Dim 

Nothing 

Pherch 

Y  ferch 

A  daughter 

Tetuva 

Edifar 

Penitent 

Leamor 

Ar  lafar 

Saying 

Cafas 

Ceifio 

To  fearch 

Cark 

Carchar 

To  bind  ;  Lat.  career 

Kain 

Cammu 

To  bend 

CafFa 

CyfF 

A  beam 

Cevel 

Ar  gyfyl 

Near 

Dumga 

Dammeg 

A  fimile 

Tor  and  Sor 

Tarw 

A  bull  ;  Lat.  taurus 

Turna 

Teyrn 

A  prince,  tyrant 

Manos 

Myddyn 

A  mountain 

•*     If       v 

AND 


CRITICAL, 


33* 


Hetreiv. 

Derivatives. 

Englljk. 

Malas 

Melys 

Sweet 

Palac 
Bane 

Plygu 
Maine 

To  fold 
A  bench 

Malal 

Malu 

TO  grind 

Marak 

Marc 

A  note 

Cadif 

Gwadu 

To  tell  a  lie 

Tohum 

Eyfn 

Depth 

Colar 

Coler 

A  neckband,  collar 

Corontha 

Coron 

A  crown 

Berek 

Breg 

A  breach 

Bagad 

Bagad 

A  great  many 

Arach 

Arogli 

To  fmell 

Nagafh 

Yn  agos         * 

To  approach 

Ciliah 

Ceilliau 

Stones 

Gevr 

Cawr 

A  giant 

Kec 

Ceg 

A  mouth 

Kim 

Cwyno 

To  lament 

Natfar 

Dinyftr 

Deftru&ion,  or  ruin 

Pinnah 

Pinagl 

Pinnacle 

Mahalal 

Mawl  or  Moli 

To  praife 

Hedel 

Hoedl 

Life 

Halal 

Haul 

Sun 

Gavel 

Gafael 

Tenure 

Lafhadd 

Glafaidd 

Blueifli 

Gerem 

Grym,  grymmus 

Bony  or  ftrong 

Mafac 

Cym-myfcu 

To  mingle 

Gana 

Canu 

To  fmg  ;  Lat.  cano 

Celimah 

Calumnia      Lat. 

Reproach 

Netz 

Nifus 

Endeavor 

Ptfel 

Pfiled 

To  make  bear 

Shufhan 

Soufon 

Lilly 

Shecan 

Sceneo 

To  dwell  in  tabernacles 

Kalal 

Gwael             Br. 

Vile 

Taffi 

Diffoddi 

To  extinguifh 

Tfelem 

Delw 

An  image 

Hoberi 

Obry 

Men  over  againfl 

Aen.-adon 

Anudon 

Difclaimins$  God,    or 
perjury." 

HERE 

NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

HERE  are  about  fifty  Englifh  words,  which,  from 
their  near  refemblance  to  the  Hebrew,  both  in  found 
and  fignification,  muft  have  been  borrowed  from  the 
latter  in  modern  ages,  or  been  preferred  thro  fucceflive 
generations  from  Heber  to  the  prefent  times.  But 
they  could  not  have  been  introduced  into  Englifh  in 
modern  ages,  for  many  of  them  are  found  in  the  other 
branches  of  the  Gothic,  the  German,  Danifti  and 
Svvediih  ;  and  it  can  be  proved  that  they  exifted  in  the 
original  Gothic  or  northern  language.  For  example, 
our  word  earth  is  found  in  Hebrew,  and  in  all  the  dia 
lects  of  the  Gothic.  Hebrew,  ert  or  ertz  ;  Welfli, 
d'aira  ;  Greek,  era  ;  Latin,  terra  5  Gothic,  airtbai  ;  an 
cient  German,  ertb  or  berth  -}  Saxon,  eartho  ;  Low  Dutch, 
aerden  ;  High  Dutch,  erden ;  Swifs,  erden  -y  Scotch,  airtb  ; 
Norwegian  or  Norfe,  iorden  ;  Danifh,  iorden ;  Swedifh, 
iordenne ;  Irelandic,  iordu.  In  the  pronunciation  of 
thefe  words  there  is  little  difference,  except  fuch  as  is 
common  to  the  feveral  languages.  The  ancients  afpi- 
rated  their  words  more  frequently  than  the  moderns  5 
hence  the  old  Germans  pronounced  the  word  with  b,  as 
appears  by  a  paffage  in  Tacitus,  De  Mor.  Germ.  40. 
"  Nee  quidquam  notabile  in  fmgulis,  nifi  quod  in  com 
mune  Herthum,  id  eft  terram^  matrem  colunt." — The 
modern  nations  of  the  north  generally  write  and  pro 
nounce  d  where  we  write  tb  ;  as  erden  ;  and  the  /  of  the 
Norwegians  anfwers  to  our  e  or  _y,  fo  that  iorden  is  pro 
nounced  yorden  ;  and  it  is  remarkable  that  many  of  the 
common  Englifh  people  (till  pronounce  earth^  yerth. 

THE  Hebrevvr  turna  is  found  in  the  Britifh  teyrn,  fig- 
nifying  a  prince  or  ruler.  This  word  is  the  root  of  the 
Greek  turannos,  the  Latin  tyrannus^  the  Britifh .dyrnas^  a 
kingdom  or  jurifdi^tion,  which  is  flill  preferved  in  the 
modern  Welfh  deyrnas  ;  and  we  fee  the  word  in  the 
name  of  the  celebrated  Britifh  commander,  Vortighern. 
Our  word  tyrant  is  derived  from  it,  but  it  is  always  ufed 
jn  a  bad  fenfe. 

IN  the  Hebrew  reclms  or  rekus^  we  have  the  origin  of 
the  Englifh  rich,  riches^  and  the  termination  rick 

in 


A  N  »    C  R  1  T  I  C  A  L.  333 

in  bifhop-r/V/f,  and  anciently,  in  king-r/V/f  ;  the  Word 
originally  denoting  landed  property,  in  which  wealth  was 
fuppofed  to  confift,  and  afterwards  jurifdittion.  From 
the  fame  word  are  derived  the  Ariglo  Saxon  rye ;  the 
Franco  Theotife,  rihhi ;  the  Cimbric,  r'tckle.  ;  the  an 
cient  Irifh  or  Gaedhlig,  riogda  ;  the  Low  Dutch,  rijcke  5 
the  Frific,  rick  ;  the  German,  retch  ;  the  Swifs,  rijch  ; 
the  Danifh,  rige  ;  the  Norwegian,  rlga  ;  the  Swedifh, 
ricke ;  the  French,  riche,  and  the  Spanifh,  riccos,  a  gen 
eral  name  for  nobility,  or  wealthy  proprietors  of  land, 

THE  word  Caer  feems  to  have  beefa  a  very  ancient 
name  for  a  city  or  town.  We  probably  fee  this  word 
in  a  great  number  of  Welih  names,  Carmarthen^  Car 
narvon,  Carlifle,  &c.  This  word  feems  alfo  to  be  the 
origin  of  Cairo,  in  Egypt  ;  Carthage  or  town  of  the 
horfe  ;*  the  ctrthe  of  the  Numidians,  and  the  Caere  of 
the  Etrufcan.  "  Inde  Turnus  Rutilique,  diffifi  rebus, 
ad  florentes  Etrufcorum  opes  Mezentiumque  eorum 
regem,  confugiunt  ;  qui  Caere,  opulento  turn  oppido 
imperitans — haud  gravatim  focia  arma  Rutulis  junxit." 
— - Liv.  lib.  i.  2*  Here  we  hear  of  the  word  before  the 
foundation  of  Rome* 

BUT  the  affinity  between  the  Hebrew  and  Britifh  is 
much  more  obvious,  than  that  between  the  Hebrew 
and  Englifh.  There  are  about  one  hundred  and  eighty 
Britifh  words  in  the  foregoing  table,  which  are  clearly 
the  fame  as  the  Hebrew  ;  and  there  is  no  way  to  ac 
count  for  the  fact,  but  by  fuppofing  them  to  be  all  de^ 
rived  from  the  fame  primitive  tongue. 

THE  refemblance  between  the  Wclfh,  Latin  and 
Englifti  may  be  obferved  in  the  following. 

Weljh.  Latin.  Englijh. 

Y'fgol  fchola  fchooi 

Y'fpelio  fpolio  fpoil 

Y'fprid 

*  THE  armorial  enfign  of  Carthage  v.-as  a  korfe* 


334        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

Weljh.  Latin.  Engtijh. 

Y'fprid  fpiritus  fpirit 

Y'ftad  flatus  ftate 

Y'ftod  ftadium  furlong. 

THE  old  Britons  however  might  have  borrowed  thefe 
words  from  the  Romans,  during  their  government  of 
the  liland  ;  as  the  Englifh  did  many  of  theirs  at  a  later 
period. 

THE  fame  remark  will  not  apply  to  the  following  : 


Weljh. 

Latin. 

Irijb. 

Englijh. 

Guin 

vinum 

fin 

wine 

Guyl 

vigiliae 

feil      . 

watch 

Gur 

vir 

fcarr 

man 

Guynt 

ventus 

wind 

Gual 

Vallum 

wall 

Gofper  vefper  fealkor 

guefpor 

Guedhar 

weather 

Guerth  virtus  worth 

Guylht  wild 

IN  this  table,  we  fee  the  different  nations  begin  the 
fame  word  with  a  different  confonant.  The  ancient 
Latin  v  was  pronounced  as  our  w  ;  vinum,  winum  ; 
hence  the  Englifh  wine.  So  in  the  following  : 


Latin. 

Engltjb. 

Latin. 

Englijk* 

Via 

way 

Vefpa 

wafp 

Venio,ventum 

went 

Volvo 

wallow 

Vellus 

wool 

Volo 

will.* 

THAT 

*  IT  is  remarkable  that  the  Germans  pronounce  this  word  ivdhny 
and  luill,  Irke  the  Roman  i'olcy  pronounced  woto.  Many  oJd  people  in 
America  retain  this  pronunciation  to  this  day  ;  I  wall,  or  wool,  for  will. 

THE  Roman  pronunciation  of  *v  is  ftill  preferved  in  England  and  A- 
nn^rit?.  5  veal,  weal  ;  "jcjjdy  weflel  j  and  10  is  often  changed  into  t>  orf  j 
ivine,  vine,  ot  even  fine. 

TH^  Romans  often  pronounced  t  where  we  ufe  d\  as  trahot  draw. 


AMI*    CRITICAL. 


335 


THAT  the  Welfh  mould  pronounce  gu,  where  we 
pronounce  w,  may  feem  ftrange  ;  yet  fuch  is  the  facl, 
and  an  anatomift  will  readily  affign  the  reafon.  The 
French,  in  the  fame  manner,  ufe  g  where  we  write  and 
pronounce  w. 


Englijk. 

War 

Warrant 

Ward 

Wife 

Wile 

Wage 

Wicket 

William 

Wales 


French* 

guerre 

garrant 

gard 

guife 

guile 

gage 

guicket 

Guillaum 

Gales,  Gaul,  Gallia.* 


A  NUMBER  at  leaft  of  the  words  in  the  foregoing  ta 
bles,  muft  have  exifted  in  the  feveral  languages  from  the 
earlieft  times  ;  and  therefore  muft  have  been  derived 
from  the  fame  flock. 

IN  the  following  words,  we  trace  the  common  origin 
of  the  Greek  and  Gothic  languages. 


Greek. 

Engtijb.                 Greek. 

Englljh. 

Kardia  7 
Kear     J 
Kio 

heart 
hie 

Pur 
Flatus 
Xeras 

fire 
plate 
fear 

Kaleo 
Koilas 
Kedas 
Kerdas 

hail,  call 
hollow 
heed,  care 
hire 

Mignuo 
Eileo 
Kairo 
Gonu 

mingle 
heal%  hail 
cheer 
knee 

Keras 
Axine 

horn,  herald 
ax 

Knix 
Zeteo 

gnat 
feek 

Ophrun 

frown 

THE 

*!N  teaching  Englifh  to  a  Spaniard,  I  found  that  In  attempting  to 
pronounce  words  beginning  with  TV,  he  invariably  bsjan  with  the  found! 
**£ £u  >  wHf  ne  would  pronounce  vutlL 


336        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

THE  reader  will  find  no  difficulty  in  believing  thefe 
words  to  be  from  the  fame  root,  when  he  is  told  that 
the  Greeks  and  the  northern  nations  of  Europe  pro 
nounced  with  a  ftrong  guttural  afpirate  ;  and  that  k  a- 
iriong  the  Greeks  was  often  a  mere  afpirate,  like  b. 
Thus  the  Romans  often  pronounced  c  ;  for  which  rea- 
fon  that  letter  is  often  omitted,  and  h  fubftituted  in 
modern  Englifli.  Curro  and  hurry  are  the  fame  word; 
and  fo  are  cornu  and  born  -,  Carolus  and  Harold. 

Greek.  Latin.  EngUJb. 

'Oinos  vinum  wine 

Damao  domo  tame 

Zeugos  jugum  yoke 

Upper  fuper  upper 

Gnoo  ?  nofco  1         , 

Ginofko  5  cognofco  J 

SOME  old  people  Mill  pronounce  the  k  in  know. 

IN  the  following,  the  Welfh  differ  from  the  Greek  irt 
the  prepofitives  or  initial  mutes  ;  but  they  are  clearly 
from  the  fame  root. 

Greek.  Weljh.  Englifi. 

Stoma  faman  mouth 

Ikanos  digon  fufficient 

Arke  d'erke  beginning 

Airo  d'uyrey  arife 

Platun  Ihydon  broad 

Papyrun  bruyn  rufhes 

Treko  rhedeg  run 

Petalon  dalen  loaf.* 

IN  the  following  words,  the  Welfh  are  nearer  the 
Greek  than  the  Latin  ;  yet  all  came  from  one  flock. 

Greek, 

*  THIS  woia  is  found  m  moft  of  the  branches  of  the  Gothic. 


AND    CRITICAL. 


Grttk. 

Weljh. 

Latin. 

Englifi. 

Helios 

heil 

fol 

fun 

Hypnos 

hyn,  heppian 

fommis 

ileep 

Halon 

halen 

fal 

fait 

Hamokis 

hamal 

fi  mills 

like 

Bounos 

ban 

mons 

mountain 

Kleas 

klad.  Comifa  klas 

laus 

praife 

Pepto 

pobo 

coquo 

cook 

Hyle 

hely 

fylva 

woods 

Krios 

kor 

aries 

ram. 

THESE  words  are  iricoriteftibly  the  fame,  with  mere 
dialectical  variations.  All  are  branches  of  the  fame 
flock,  yet  neither  can  claim  the  honor  of  being  that 
ftock. 

BUT  the  rridft  curious  etymological  analyfis  ever 
exhibited  perhaps  in  any  language,  is  that  found  in 
Gebelin's  works.  Take  the  following  fpecimens. 

IN  the  primitive  language  (of  Europe)  the  monofyl- 
lable  tar,  ter,  tor  or  tro,  for  it  appeared  under  thefe 
forms,  figninedyir^.  It  was  compofed  of  /  and  ar  or 
dyar,  roughnejs,  rapidity*  Hence  tar  exprefled  the  idea 
of  force*  with  the  collateral  ideas  of  violence,  rigor, 
grandeur,  &c.  From  tar  are  derived,  taunts,  a  bull  ; 
torrent^  target,  trunk,  truncare^  to  cut  off ;  terror^  trepany 
tare^  detriment,  trancher,  to  cut ;  retrench  ;  tardus,  tardy^ 
retard,  iergum,  becaufe  things  heavy,  that  require  force, 
were  carried  upon  the  back  ;  intrigue,  for  it  implies 
difficulties  ;  trop,  too  much,  troop,  ter,  trois,  which  o- 
riginally  fignified  a  multitude  ;  for  many  favage  na 
tions  have  names  only  for  the  three  firft  numbers  ; 
force,  tres,  very ;  treffes,  a  braid  or  plait  of  hair  in  three 
divifions  ;  triangle,  tribunal,  tribe,  attribute,  contribute,  &c« 
trident,  trillion,  trio,  trinity,  entre,  enter,  taken  from  a  re  - 
lation  of  three  objects,  om  between  two,  makes  a  third  ; 
hence  internal,  external,  trovers,  acrofs  ;  tradition,  pafT- 
ing  from  one  to  another  ;  traffic,  trahir,  to  draw  ;  trai- 
Ur,  trepidation^  intrepid.  From  tra,  between,  and  es,  it 
X  is, 


338        NOTES,    HIS  TO  RFC  A  L 

is,  came  the  Celtic,  treb,  a  narrow  pafs,  iftralt,  Jlrift, 
Fr.  etroit,  aftrihgent,  detvoit,  ftrait  ;  dilirefs,  Jlrengtb. 
The  compounds  are  numerous.  Intrinfic,  entrails,  in 
troduce^  Extraneous,  extravagant,  transcendent,  transfer, 
transform,  tranfgrefs,  tranfaft,  tranjlate,  tranfmit,  tranjmi- 
grate,  tranjmutatidn,  &c. 

POLTROON  is  from  polhx,  a  thumb,  and  truncare, 
to  cut  off  5  for  cowards  ufe  to  cut  their  thumbs  to  a- 

void  fervice. 

* 

T    E    M. 

TEM  fignitled  river,  water.  Hence  tempera  in  Lat- 
m  fignined  to  plunge  into  water.  We  to  this  day  fay  to 
temper  iron  orjleel.  To  temper,  is  to  moderate.  From 
this  root  come  temperance,  temperature,  and  a  numerous 
catalogue  of  dther  words.  The  river  Thames  derives 
its  name  from  the  fame  root. 

V  A,    to  go,  radical. 

FROM  <va,  the  Celtic  root,  we  find  a  multitude  of 
branches  in  Greek,  Latin,  Englim  and  French.  It  is 
an  onomaiope,  a  word  borrowed  from  the  found  of  our 
feet  in  walking.  Its  derivatives  are,  wade,  evade,  eva- 
fion,  invade,  invcifion,  venlo,  Lat.  arid  venir,  Fr.  to  come  ; 
Venia  arid  venial,*  adventure,  avenue,  cdnvenio,  conveni 
ence,  convention,  covenant  perhaps,  contravene,  intervene, 
invent,  prevent,  province^  advance,  via,  way,  voyage,  con 
voy,  convey,  obviate,  vex,  inveflivc,  vein,  a  way  for  the 
tlood  ;  voiiure,  Ft',  fof  a  load  to  carry  j  eviiare,  Lat. 
to  fhuil  ;  inevitable. 

To  thefe  derivatives,  I  will  juft  add  a  comparative 
View  of  the  verbs  have  and  be  in  fcveral  languages. 

EngKJh. 

At-tusivt   to  the  ancient    cuftom  of  pardoning  by  giving  per- 
to  depart. 


f  FRONTIER  fettlernent  ;  fo  called,  becaufe  the  Romxns  paftd 
fetus  territory,  in  going  to  or  from  Rome* 


AND    C  R  I  T  I  C  A.L 
HAVE. 


Latin.      Frtnth.  Germ.  Spanih. 

I  have        habeo       ai*    •      habe     he          ey 

Thou  haft  batjes       as  haft       as          has 

He  has        habet       a  hat       as         ,  ha; 

We  have    habemus  avons     haben  avemos  hamos,    ave- 

mos 
You  have  habetis     avez  .......  Habet    aveis      eys,  eveys 

They  have  habent     bht         haben  ah'         ham 

The   Subftantfa   Verb    B  E. 

Latin.  French.  Germ.  Spanijk.       Portugvefe* 
lam,  be  fum      fuis        'bin      eftoy  &  foy  jfou,  eftou 

Thou  art,beei>.  es         es  bjft     eftas,eres    cs,  eftas 

Heis,be  eft       eft          eft-es.  efta,  es        he,  efla 

We  are,  be      Tuhius  fomme^  find    eftamosjfo-  fomos,  efta- 

mds  riiOs 

You  are;  be     eftis     etes        feyd    eftais,  fois    foys,  eftoys 
They  are,  be    funt     font      -find    eilan,  Ton     |am,  eftam 

IT  is  indifputabJe  that  hAve,  in  all  thef$  languages,  is 
from  the  fame  root.  Butj  there  feenr  to  have  been 
anciently  two  fubftantive  verbs,  or  perhaps  three,  from 
which  modern  nations  .have  borrowed  ;  viz,  the  Greek: 
«v«»  or  «(w-»>  or  the  Latin  eft,  from  which  mod  of  the 
foregoing  are  derived  ;  the  Teutonic  beon,  .'whence  the 
Germans  have  their  bin  and  btfl,  and  the  Englifh  their 
be  arkl  b&ft  ;  and  an  old  Gothic  or  Teutonic  word,  u)eor» 
than,  whence  the  Danes  have  derived  their  vjsrer,  and 
the  Englifh  and  Germans  their  were  arid  werden.  In  the 
old  Englifh  phrafe,  "  woe  worth  the  day,'*  we  fee  thd 
fame  verb. 

HAVING  ftatcd  my  reafons  and  authorities  for  be- 
Ueving  all  the  European  languages  defcended  from  one 
parent  tongue,  I  will  here  fubjoia  the  Lord's  Prayer,  in 

feveral 

*  THE  French  and  Spanilh  rarely  or  never  afpirate  an  A  }  and  ia  rhis 
v;oird  they  hsve  omitted  it  moftly  in  Wiixinjj^ 


346       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

feveral  languages  of  Celtic  and  Gothic  origin.  The 
affinity  between  all  the  branches  of  the  Gothic  is  very 
vifible  ;  the  affinity  likewife  between  all  the  branches 
of  the  Celtic  is  very  obvious,  except  the  ancient  Irifh* 
The  Cantabrian  and  Lapland  tongues  have  little  re- 
femblance  to  either  of  the  flocks  or  their  branches. 

Very 


GOTHIC. 


1 

i 

2.  Old  SA*- 
ON,  or  AN 

2.  FRANCIC, 
or  FRANCO- 

3.    ClMBRIC, 

or  Old  ICE 

GLO-SAXON. 

THEO- 

rise. 

LANDIC. 

JL     JU 

i 

i 

i 

1 

<-•      hi     oo     4* 

M          N»       U, 

M      N>,  G*  .  «£ 

•               •               •               * 

*            *             • 

•        •         • 

• 

W    W    Cd    ^ 
55     fo     2     t* 

O  O  2s 

t*5       W       ^ 

"  ?  °  £ 

W      O      >      ^ 

g  >  s  s 

*•*       H                 O 

S  55   S 

ff  r  f 

f       f       2J       " 

>       5!       *-•       tJ 

^            O»            1-4 

g  -   ~°  - 

•        O       rt       O 

>  > 

5?       S8 

55      W               5 

g     0     ?     55 

s  s  t 

C*-;-ri'-S 

1  §  i* 

8    ^ 

5^ 

p'  > 
w^ 

o 

**t 

• 

sr      s 

g.  ?  s 

S    2 

«.    5     o. 

O  .> 

o 

§  £  ? 

c 

GO 

g     ^    CQ 
*p       ^       C 
O       *D 

o 

««-^ 

^rr 

I 


5 


A  K  D    CRITICAL, 


Very  little  affinity  is  difcoverable  between  the  original 
Gothic  and  Celtic  or  their  derivatives  ;  yet  this  is  not 
a  proof  that  they  were  ab  origme  diftinft  languages;  for 
the  words  in  this  prayer  are  few,  and  it  has  been  prov 
ed  that  there  are  many  words  common  to  both  thofc 
ancient  tongues. 

CELTIC. 


.  The  Ancient     2.  The  Ancient     3.  The  Ancient 

GAULISH,      BRITISH.     "  IRISH. 


§ 


*"4  tO        CO 


si 


X 


r 


6s 
«< 


* 

! 

SPECIMEN 


342      NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


SPECIMENS  of  the  GOTHIC  LANGUAGES. 
The  ancient  Gothic  of  Ulpbt/as. 

ATTAunfarthuinhiminam.  i,  Veihnai  namo^thein. 
2.  Quimai  thiudinafius  theins.  3.  Vairthai  vilja  theins, 
fue  in  himinajah  ana  airthai.  4.  Hlaif  unfarana  thana 
fipteinan  gif  uns  himmadaga.  5.  Jah  aflet  uns  thatei 
fculans  fijaima  fua  fue  jah  veis  afietam  thaim  fkulain 
imfaraim.  6.  Jah  ni  bringais  uns  in  fraiftubnjai.  7.  Ak 
Jsufei  uns  af  thamma  ubilin.  Amen. 

[From  Chamberlayn's  0  ratio  Dominica  in  diverfas  ommumfcre  Gentium 


The  ANCIENT  LANGUAGES  derived  from  the  GOTHIC 
j.  ii.  in. 


Anglo  Saxon, 


jr. 
Franco 


j  or  old 
Icelandic. 

FADER    uor, 

fom    eft   i    him- 

lum.     i.  Halgad 

warde  thit  nama. 

2.Tilkomme  thitt 

rikie.       3.    Skie 

thin  vilie,  fo  fom 

i   himmaiam,   fo 

och  po  iordanne, 

4.  Wort  dachii- 

cha  brodh  gif  os  i 

dagh.  5.  Ogh  for- 

lat  os  uora  ikul- 

dar,  fo  loin  ogh  vi 

for  late    them    os 

fkildighe  are.    6, 

Cghinledcsikkic 

ifretaifam.  7.  U- 

tan   frels  os   ifni 

ondo.     Amen. 


[rrcrr  Chamhevlayn,       [From  Cbamberlayn,       [From    Chamberlaynt 
?•  i6.j  p.  6j.l  p.  $4%] 

SPECIMEI-;^ 


UREN  Fader, 

FATER  unfer 

thicarthinheof- 

thu  thar  bid  in 

iias.     i.  Sie  ge- 

himile.  i.  Si  ge- 

halgud  thin  ao- 

heilagot  thin  na- 

r.ia.     2.  To  cy- 

mo.    2.  Qiieme 

ineth  thin   rye. 

thin  rihhi.   3.  Si 

3.  Sie  thin  willa 

thin  willo,  fo  her 

fue  is  in  heoinas, 

in  himile  ift  o  fi 

and   in    eortho. 

her  in  erdu.    4. 

4.  Uren  hlaf  of- 

Unfarbrottagal- 

erwiftlic  fel  us  to 

ihhazgibunshu- 

daeg.      5.  And 

itu.  5.1'nti  furlaz 

forgefe  us  fey  Ida 

unsnufara  feuldi 

uina,  fue  wefor- 

fouuir  furlazam- 

gefan   fcvldgum 

es  unfaron  fcui- 

urum.     6,  And 

digon.  6.  Jnti  ni 

no  inlead  ufig  in 

gileiteft  uniih  in 

cuftnung.  7»  Ah 

coftunga.   7.  U- 

^eiiig  Uiichfrom 

zouh  arloii  unfi 

n:c.     Amen. 

fo  nubile.  A  men. 

A  x  D    C  R.  I  T  I  C  A  L, 


34  J 


SPECIMENS  of  the  CELTIC  LANGUAGES. 

I  AM  not  able  to  produce  any  fpecimen  of  the  Cel 
tic,  at  leaft  any  verfion  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  which 
can  be  oppofed  in  point  of  antiquity  to  the  Gothic 
fpecimen  frooi  Ulphilas,  who  flourifhed  A.  D. 
^65. — As  the  Celts  were  fettled  in  thcfe  countries 
long  before  the  Goths,  and  were  expofed  to  vari 
ous  revolutions  before  their  arrival,  their  language 
has,  as  might  be  expected,  undergone  greater  and 
earlier  changes  than  the  Gothic  ;  fo  that  no  fpeci 
men  of  the  old  original  Celtic  is  I  believe,  now  to 
be  found. 


ANCIENT  liAtiGV  AGES*  derived  from  the  CELTIC, 
I.  II.  in. 


Anc.  Gaul- 
ijh. 

OF  this 
language  I 
cannot  find 
any  fpeci 
men  which 
can  be  de 
pended  on, 


Cambrian,   or  An 
cient  BriiHh. 

ETEN    Taad 

rhuvn  wytyn  y  neofo- 
edodd.    i.  Sqntfiddicr 

yr  henvit  tau.  2. 
JDevedy  dyrnas  dau. 
3.  Gunekr  dy  wollys 
ar  ryddayar  tnegis  ag 
yny  nefi.  4.  Epi  bar  a 
beunyddvuL  dyro  inni 
beddivu.  5.  Ammad~ 
deu  ynny  cpi  deledion, 
mevis  aj  i  maddevu  in 
deledvvir  n'waw.  6. 
Signa  thowys  ni  in 
brofedigaeth.  y.  A^- 
joyn  gwared  m  rbag 
drug.  Amen. 
[^rorn  Chambcrl.  p.  47.] 


Ancient   Irifh,    or 
Gaedhlig. 

OUR  Narme  a- 
taarneamb.  i.Bea- 
nich  a  tainit}.  2.  Gt 
diga  de  rlogda.  3. 
Go  dent  a  du  hoillair 
talm  in  marte  ar  ne^ 
amb.  4.  Tabair  de-* 
im  amugb  ar  na~ 
ran  limbali.  5.  Au- 
gus  mai  duln  ar  fi~ 
acb  a  m  b  a  II  maa  mbla 
arfiacba.  6.  Afr/?/g 
fen  amarlbb  .  *j.  A<.b 
Jaarfa  jm  o  d:h, 
Amen. 

[From  Dr.   A  nth.  R.iy- 


the  liiuovy  ot   iieiaii<J? 

P.  2,  3,  af 

SPECIMENS 


THF.  above  fpecimen  of  the  ancient  Ivift  is  judged  to  b- 
is  ofd.     Sec  d  Cuj.aer's  JJiilcrutiun  on  ux  rii:t.;iv  oi  iit 


344        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


SPECIMENS  of  the  GOTHIC  LANGUAGES. 

I.  MODERN  LANGUAGES  derived  from  th 
OLD    SAXON. 


EngllJI). 

OUR  Father,  which  art 
in  heaven,  i.  Hallowed 
|>e  thy  name.  2.  Thy 
kingdom  come.  3.  Thy 
•will  be  done  in  earth  as  it 
is  in  heaven.  4.  Give  us 
this  day,  our  daily  bread. 

5.  And  forgive  us  our  debts 
as  we  forgive  our  debtors. 

6.  And  lead  us  not  into 
temptation.  7.  But  deliver 
us  from  evil.     Amen. 


u. 

Broad  Scotch. 

URE  Fader,  whilk  art  in 
heyin.  i .  Hallouit  be  thy 
naim.  2.  Thy  kingdum 
cum.  3.  Thy  wull  be  dun 
in  airth,  as  it  is  in  hevin. 
4.  Gie  ufs  this  day  ure  daily 
breid.  5.  And  forgive  ufs 
ure  debts,  afs  we  forgien 
ure  debtouris.  6.  And  leid 
ufs  na*  into  temptation. 
7.  Bot  deliver  ufs  frae  evil. 
Amen. 


[From  the  Englifh  Te^ament.j  [From  a  Scotch  Gentleman.] 


III. 


IV. 


Low  Butch,  or  Eelgk.        Frific^or  FriczclandTcngue. 


ONSE  Vader,  u'e  daer 
fcijt  in  de  hemelen.  I.  U- 
>ven  naem  worcle  ghehey- 
light.  2.  U  rijcke  kome. 
3.  Uwen  wille  ghefchiede 
pp  der  aerden,  gelijck  in 
<len  hemel.  4.  Onfe  da- 
gel  ijck  broodt  gheeft  ons 
heden.  5.  Ende  vergheeft 
ons  onfe  fchulden,  ghelijck 
Vvy  oock  onfe  fchuldcnaren 
yergeven.  6.  Ende  en  leyt 
ons  niet  in  Verfoeckinge. 
7.  Macr  vciioft  ons  van- 
den  boofen.  Amen. 

'i-oin  the  New  Teft.  in  Uuti.!;, 


Ws  Haita  duu  denlu 
bifte  yne  hymil.  i.  Dyn 
name  wird  heiligt.  2.  Dyn 
rick  tokomme.  3.  Dyn 
wille  moet  fchoen,  opt  yrt- 
yck  as  yne  hymile.  4.  Ws 
dielix  brae  jov  ws  jwed. 

5.  In  verjou  ws?  ws  fchyl- 
den,  as  vejac  ws  fchylclnirs. 

6.  In  lied  ws  nacl:  in  ver- 
fieking.      7.  Din  fry  ws 
vin  it  quaed.     Amen. 

[From  Cjiamberlayn,  p.  68. J 


AND    CRITICAL. 


345 


SPECIMENS  of  the  CELTIC  LANGUAGES. 

JL  MODERN  LANGUAGES  derived  from  the  AN. 

CIENT  BRITISH,  cr  CYMRAEG. 

i. 

Welih,  or  Cymraeg. 

EIN  Tad,  yr  hivn  wyt  yn  y  ncfoedd. 
j.  Sanftieddier  dy  Emu.  2.  Dcved  dy 
deyrnas.  3.  Bydcted  dy  ewy/fys  or  y 
ddaiar  megis  y  ?nae  yn  y  nefoedd.  4.  Dy- 
ro  i  ni  heddyw  em  bar  a  beunyddiol.  5, 
rfmadde  ml  ein  dyledionfel  y  maddeuwn 
ni  ?n  dyledwyr.  6.  Ag  nag  arwain  ni 
i  brofedigaetb.  7.  Eithr  guoared  ni 
rhag  drwg.  Amen. 

[Cojninunicated  by  a  Gentleman  of  Jefus 
College,  Oxon.j 


II. 

Armoric,  or  Language  of 
Britanny  in  France. 

HO N  Tad,  pehudijfou  en 
efaou.  i.  Da  hanou  bezel 
fanciifiet.  2.  Devet  aor- 
nomp  da  rouantelaez.  3. 
Da  eol  bezel  graet  en  douar^ 
eual  maz  eon  en  euf.  4.  Ro 
dimp  kyziou  bon  bar  a  fem- 
deziec.  5.  Pardon  di?np 
hon  pechedou^  eual  ma  par- 
donomp  da  nep  peg  ant  ezomp 
offanczet.  6.  Ha  na  dilaes 
quet  a  hanomp  en  temptation. 
J.  Hoguen  hon  diliur  diouz 
drouc.  Amen. 


HI. 
Cornifh. 

NT  Tax,  ez  yn  neau.  T. 
B onega s  yw  tba  banaw.  2. 
Tha  gwlakotk  doaz.  3.  T^ha 
bonagatb  bogweez  en  nore 
pocoragen  neau.  4.  Roe 
tbenyen  dyfrma  gon  dytk  ba- 
ra  givians.  5.  Ny  gan 
rabn  weary  cara  ny  givi- 
ant  nuns.  6.  O  cabin  le- 
dia  ny  nara  idn  tentation* 
7.  Buz  diher  ny  ibart  dofg* 
Amen. 

[From  Chambcrlayn,  p.  50.} 


[From  Chambsrlayn,  p.  rj.] 


SPECIMEN** 


346      NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


SPECIMENS  of  the  GOTHIC  LANGUAGES 

II,  MODERN  LANGUAGES  derived  from  the 

CilNT  GERMAN,  or  FRANCIC,  &c. 


High  Dutch,  (proper.) 

UNSER  Vater  in  dem 
Himmel.  i.  Dein  name 
werde  geheiliget.  2.  Dein 
reich  komme.  3.  Dein 
\ville  gefehehe  auf  erden, 
wie  im  himmel.  4.  Un- 
icr  taeglieh  brodt  gib  uns 
lieute.  *>•  Und  vergib  uns 
u n  fere  fchulden,  \vie  wir 
unferu  fchuldlgern  verge- 
ben.  6.  Und  fuehre  uns 
nicht  in  Verfuchung.  7. 
Sondern  erloefe  uns  von 
dem  vbcl.  Amen. 

[from  the  common  German  New 
T  eftament,  printed  at  London. 


II. 

High  Dutch  of  the  Suevlan 
DiakZt. 

FATTER  aufar  dear  du 
bifcht  em  hemmal.  i. 
Gehoyleget  wearde  dain 
nam.  2.  Zuakomme  dain 
reych.  3.  Dain  will  gfchea 
ufF-earda  as  em  hemmal. 
4.  Aufar  deglich  brau4 
gib  as  huyt.  5.  Und  fer- 
giab  as  aufre  fchulda,  wia 
wiar  fergeaba  aufara  fchul- 
digearn.  6.  Und  fuar  as 
net  ind  ferfuaching.  7. 
Sondern  erlais  as  fom  iba|, 
Amen. 

[From  Chaml>erlayn''s  Oratiy  Dp« 

wmk a,  p.  64. J 


HI. 


The  Siv 

VA  1  TER  unfer,  der  du  bift  in 
hiinlen.  i.  Geheyligt  werd  dyn 
nam.  2.  Rukumm  uns  dijn  rijch. 
3.  Dyn  will  gefchahe,  wie  im  him 
mel,  alfo  auch  ufF  erden.  4.  Gib 
uns  hut  unfer  taglich  brot.  5.  Und 
vergib  uns  unfere  fchulden,  wie  anch 
v;ir  vergaben  unfern  fchulderen.  6. 
Und  fuhr  UQS  nicht  in  verfuchnyfs.  .  7. 
Sunder  erlos  uns  vqn  dem  bofen, 


[From  Chamberlayn,  ?.  65.] 


D    CRITICAL. 


347 


SPECIMENS  of  the  CELTIC  LANGUAGES, 

III.  MODERN  LANGUAGES  derived  j ram  tbs 
ANCIENT  IRISH. 


Gaidhlig." 


AR  nM'qir  ata  ar  ne- 

amb.  i  .  Nao?nbthar  halnrn. 
2.  Tigeadh  do  riogbacbd.  3. 
Deuntar  do  tboil  ar  an  ttal- 
amh^  mar  do  nltbear  ar  ne- 
amh.  4.  Ar  naran  laeatb- 
amhall  tabhair  dhuinn  a  niu. 
5.  Agus  maltb  dhuinn  ar 
mar  mbaiibmid- 
dar  bhfeitbeambnuibb 
fiin.  6.  Agus  na  leigfinn 
a  ccatbughadh.  7.  Acbd 
faor  Jinn  o  olc.  Amen. 

[From  Bifhop  Bedel's  Irifh  Bible. 
Lona.  1690.  8vo.] 


II. 

Erfe,  or  Gaidhjig  Alban- 
naich. 

AR  n*  Atbair  ata  air  m~ 
amb.  I .  Gn  naombaichear  t 
tinm.  2.  Tigeadb  do  r'wg- 
hacbd.  3.  Deantbar  do  thai  I 
air  an  td  amb  mar  a  nit'iear 
air  neamh.  4.  Tabhair 
dbuinn  an  dm  ar  n  aran 
laltbeilL  5.  Agus  maltb 
dhuinn  arf.acba  ambuill  mar 
mhaithmid  d*ar  luebd-fiacb- 
aibb.*  6,  Agus  na  lag  am 
bualrcadh  finn  7.  Ach  Jao? 
Jinn  o  olc.  Amen, 

*  Feichnelnibh. 

[From  the  New  Teftament  in  the 
Erie  Lunguubc.J 


III. 

Manks,  or  Language  of  the  Ifle  of  Man. 

AYR  tf/Vz,  fayns  niau.  I.  Cajbfrickefy 
row  dt'ennym.  2.  Dy  jig  dty  reeriaughi. 
^..Dfaigney  dy  row  jeant  er  y  thalao^  ?n\r 
ts  ayns  man.  4.  Cur  d  oin  nyn  arran, 
jiu  as  gagblaa.  5.  As  leib  dooin  nyn  logh- 
tyn^  nyr  ta  Jhin  lab  dauefyn  ta  jannoo  logh- 
.  tyti  nyrf  oc.  6.  As  ny  leeidfljin  aym  mio- 
iagh.  7.  Agh  livrey  Jkin  viib  clL 


[From  the  Liturgy  in  Manks.  printed  at  London, 
1765.  Svo.J 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


SPECIMENS  of  the  GOTHIC  LANGUAGES. 

III.  MODERN  LANGUAGES  .derived  from,  the  AN 
CIENT  SCANDINAVIAN,  or  ICELANDIC,  called 
(by fame  writers)  CIMBJRJC,  or  CIMBRO  GOTHIC, 


I. 

Icelandic. 

FADER  yor  thu  Torn  ert 
ahimnum.  i.Helgeftthitt 
nafn.  2.  Tilkome  thitt  ri- 
ike.  3.  Verde  thinn  vilie, 
fo  a  jordu,  fern  a  himne. 
4.  GiefT  tbu  ofs  i  dag  vort 
daglegt  braud.  5.  Og  fier- 
gieff  ofs  vorar  fkulder,  fq 
fern  vier  fierergiefum  vo- 
rum  fkuMinautum.  6.  Og 
inleid  ofs  ecke  i  freillne. 
7.  Heldr  frelfa  thu  ofs  fra. 
illu.  Amen. 


II. 

,  or  Norfe. 

WOR  Fader  du  fom  eft 
y  himmelen.  i.  Gehailiget 
woareditnafn.  2.Tilkom- 
maosrigadit.  3.  Dinvvil- 
ia  geflcia  paa  iorden,  fom 
handler udi himmelen.  4. 
GifFofs  y  tag  wort  dagliga 
brouta.  5.  Och  forlaet  os 
wort  fkioldt,  fom  wy  for- 
lataworaikioldon.  6.  Och 
lad  os  icke  homma  yoi 
friftelfe.  7.  Man  frals  05 
fra  onet.  Amen. 


[From  Chamberlayn,  p.  70. j  [From  Chamberlayn,  p. 


III. 

Damfi. 

VOR  Fader  i  himmelen. 

1.  Helligt  vordc  ditnavn. 

2.  Tilkomme  dit  rige.    3. 
Vorde  din  villie,  paa  iorden 
fora  i  himmelen.     4.  GifF 
ofs  i  dag  vort  daglige  bred. 
5.  Oc  forlad  ofs  vor  fkyld, 
foot  wi  forlade  vore  fkyl- 
clener.      6.   Oc   leede  ofs 
jcke   i   friilelfe.     7.    Men 
frels  os  fra  ont.     Amen. 

[Fjflft  £hamberlayn,  p.  70.] 


IV. 

Swcdijh, 

FADER  war  fom  aft  i 
himmelen.  3.  Helgat  war- 
de  titt  nampn.  2.  Till 
komme  titt  ricke.  3.  Skei 
tin  willie  faa  paa  lordenne, 
fom  i  himmelen.  4.  Wart 
dagliga  brodjgiffofs  i  dagh. 
5.  Och  forlat  os  wara  fkul- 
der  fa  fom  ock  wi  forlaten 
them  ofs  fkildege  aro.  6. 
Och  inleed  ofs  icke  i  fref- 
telfe.  7.  Ut  an  frals  ofs  j 
fra  ondo.  Amen. 

[From  Chamberlayn,  p.  70.] 


AND    CRITICAL, 


344 


SPIGIMENS  of  the  FIN*  and  LAPLAND  TONGUES, 
ii  ii. 

The  Lapland  Tongue. 

ATKA  mijamjuco  he  a/" 
imnfifne*  i.  Ailis  zladdai 
tu  nam.  2.  Zweigubatta  tu 
ryki.  3.  Ziaddus  tu  willio* 
naukuchte  almejne  nau  el  ed- 
na  manna  I.  4.  Wadde  mi- 
jai  udnt  mij an  fart  pafwen, 
laibebm.  5.  Jah  andagajlo- 
ite  mi  jemljan  Juddoid^  nau- 
kucbte  mije  andagajioitebtku- 
di  mije  welgogas  lun.  6. 
Jah  JiJ/alaidi  mijabni.  7. 
/EU  tocko  kteckz&lkbma  pa- 
haft.  Amen* 


The  Finn  Languag& 

ISA  meiddnjoca  olet  tat- 
wajja.  I.  Pyhitetty  olcanfi- 
num  nimes.  2»  Lakes  tulcon 
finum  °waldacundas.  3.  O/- 
con  finun  tahtos  niin  maafe 
cuin  taiwafa.  4.  Anna  meile 
tanapaiwana  meidan  joca 
paiwainen  leipam.  5*  Sa  an- 
na  meille  meidan  fyndim  an- 
dexi  nuncuin  mekin  andex 
annam  meidan  welwottiftem. 
6.  Ja  alajohdata  meita  kiu- 
fauxen.  7.  Mutta  paajla 
meita  pahafta.  Amen* 


[From  Chambcrlayn,  p.  8a.]  [From  Chamberlayn,  p.  83.  J 


^SPECIMEN  of  the  CANTABRIAM  or  BISCAYAN 
LANGUAGE,  yfr//  preferred  in  SPAIN. 

The  Bafque. 

CURE  Aita  kerutean  cartna.  i. 
Erabilbedi  fainduqui  furejcena.  2.  E- 
ihorbedi  fure  erejjuma.  3.  Eguinbedi 
fure  borondatea  $eru  an  becala  turre*an 
ere.  4.  Emandie^agucu  egun  gure  eg- 
unoroxco  cguia.  5.  Eta  barkhadietcsit-* 
gut<fit  gure  forrac  gucere  gure  ccidunei 
barkhatcendiot^aguten  becela.  6.  Eta 
ezgaittfatcu  utc  tentaeionetan  erortcerat* 
7.  Aitdtlc  beguiragaiUatw  gakc  guci- 
etaric.  Halabiz.  ^ 

[From,  Chamberlayn,  p.  44.] 


NOTE  5,    HISTORICAL 

HERE  we  find  many  of  the  fame  words,  with  fmslf 
Variations,  in  all  the  languages  of  Teutonic  origin.  It 
is  however  obfervable  that  the  Englifh  have  foftened 
fome  words,  by  omitting  the  gutturals.  Thus  gttsal- 
gud  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  ;  gsbeiliget  in  the-  German  ; 
ghtKeyngkt  in  the  Belgic  ;  and  gebeyllgi  m  the  Swifs,  are 
foftened  into  hallowed  in  Englifh  ;  taeglich  and  'dagelijchi 
become  daily.  Similar  omirfihns  run  tlifp  the'language. 
Thus  nagely  bagel  have  become  in  Englifh .nail  and  hall. 
The^vMn  mighty  night  are  Hill  pronounced  by  the  Scotch  ; 
but  the  Engliiri  fay  mite^  nite.* 

THE  affinity  between  the  ancient  Bfitifh,  the  mod 
ern  Welfh,  and  the  Armoric,  is  very  obvious  ;  but  iri 
the  latter,  we  find  a  few  Latin  cr  French  words—  par- 
doriy  peichdott)  deliur^  which  we.fhould  naturally  expecl: 
from  the  vicinity  of  Britanny  to  the  Ftench  language. 

I  HAVE  been  at  the  pains  to  examin  a  great  numbei* 
of  radical  words  intheDanifh,and  find  the  mod  of  them, 
amounting  to  morethanfourhundred,very  little  different 
from  the  Englifh.  Where  the  Englifh  write  «,',  the  Dane's 
y?rite  v  ;  vincl  for  wind.  Where  the  Englifh  write  c  hard, 
^the  Danes,  with  more  judgement,  write  k  ;  klover^  kany 
fammery  for  cleaVe,  can,  come.  Where  the  Englifh  write 
'why  the  Danes,  with  propriety,  write  hv,  v  having  the 
found  of  w  t  as  bvady  hvi  bvalt  wbatywhyy  whole. 

THE  words,  common  to  the  Danifli  and  Ehglifh,  are 
roofrly  monofyllables. 

As  a  corroborating  proof  of  the  Eaftern  origin  of  the 
Goths,  authors  produce  the  refemblance  between  their 
religious  opinions  and  the  notions  of  the  Magi.  7~he 
Scandinavian  mythology  is  preferved  in  the  EDDA, 
written  by  Snorro  Sturlefon,  an  Icelander,  a  learned 
judge  and  firft  magiftrate  in  the  I2th  century. 

IN 


1  «*iTi 


fonum  (gli)  Anglos  in  vocibus  light,  n:\glt,  &c.  ollm  pro^ 
tulin'c  fcutio  ;  At  hunc  dierum,  quamvis  icripturaru  retineant,  1'crium 
tarnen  fere  penitus  omittunt.  Boreales  tamen,  prefertim  Scoci,  fere  ail. 
feuc  tctineat  feu  potius  ipf:us  loco  ionum  b  fubitituunt."— • —  Waliis. 


'     AND    CRITICAL,  351 

IN  this  there  are  many-  notions  which  feem  to  bear  a 
great  analogy  to  the  doctrines  revealed  in  the  Bible. 

IT  is  reprefented  in  the  Edda,  that  before  creation, 
"  all  was  one  vaft  abyfs  ;"  an  idea  not  unlike  the  fcrip- 
ture  account  of  what  we  ufually  call  chaos.  —  "  Tfyaf 
Surtur,  the  black,  (hall  come  at  the  end  of  the  world, 
vanquifh  the  gods  and  give  up  the  univerfe  to  the 
flames"  —  a  crude  notion  of  the  conflagration.  —  "That 
Tmer  the  firft  man  or  great  giant,  flept  and  fell  into  a 
fweat,  and  from  the  pit  of  his  left  arm  were  born  male 
and  female  ;"  this  has  feme  refemblance  to  the  fcrip- 
lu're  account  of  the  creation  of  the  woman  —  "  That 
the  fons  of  Bcreftew  the  giant  Ymcr,  and  all  the  giants 
of  the  froft  were  drowned,  except  Bengelmer,  who  was 
faved  in  his  bark;"  in  which  notion  we  obferve  fome 
tradition  of  the  deluge. 


dpitlion  that  the  world  will  be  deftroyed  by  fire 
feems  to  have  been  univerfal  among  the  Gothic  na 
tions.  The  defcriptions  of  that  cataftrophe  refemble 
thofe  of  the  Stoics  and  of  the  ancient  Magi  and  Zoro- 
after,  from  whom  the  idea  was  probably  taken.  Thefe 
defcriptions  all  agree  with  the  fcripture  repreientatioa 
of  that  event  in  the  material  circumftances. 

THE  doctrine  of  a  future  Rate,  or  of  a  renovation  of 
the  world,  was  part  of  the  Gothic  fyftem.  It  was 
taught  by  Zatnolxis,  the  celebrated  Druid  of  the  Geta? 
and  Scythians.  -  Herod.  Lib.  4.  §  95. 

IN  this  fame  Ed  Ja,  we  alfo  find  the  origin  of  fome 
cuftoms  ftill  remaining  among  the  defcendants  of  the 
northern  nations.  The  drinking  of  bumpers  is  not  an 
invention  of  modern  bacchanals  \  it  is  mentioned,  fable 
25,  of  the  Edda,  where  it  is  faid  Thor  challenged  one 
to  a  drinking  match. 

THE  cuftora  of  hanging  up  bumes  on  Chrifimaseve 
is  derived  probably  frorrTthe  fuperftitioiis  vener:. 
paid  to  the  MiifeltQe  by  Uie  Scandinavians. 

INDEED 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

INDEED  the  feftival  of  Chriftmas  was  grafted  upon 
an  ancient  pagan  feaft,  celebrated  at  the  winter  folftice, 
in  honour  of  the  fun  and  to  render  the  new  year  pro 
pitious.  It  anfwered  to  the  Roman  Saturnalia,  and 
was  probably  of  as  high  an  origin.  The  night  on 
which  it  was  obferved  was  called  Mother  Night^  as  that 
which  produced  the  reft  ;  and  the  feaft  itfelf  was  called 
by  the  Goths  luul. — See  Mallet's  North.  Antiq.  vol. 
I.  p.  130.  Hence  the  old  word yeul or  yule  for  Chrift 
mas  ;  a  wdrd  that  is  ftill  ufed,  or  at  leaft  has  been  ufed 
till  within  a  century  in  Scotland  and  the  north  of  Eng 
land.  "  Yule,"  fays  that  learned  antiquary,  Gowel,  "in 
the  north  parts  of  England,  is  ufed  by  the  country  peo 
ple  as  the  name  of  the  feaft  of  our  Lord's  nativity,  u- 
fually  termed  Cbrijimas.  The  fports  ufed  at  Chriftmas, 
Called  Chriftmas  Gamboles,  they  ftile  Yule  Games. 

Yule  is  the  proper  Scotch  word  for  Chriftmas." 

CoweKs  Law  Dictionary,  tit.  Yule.  The  Parliament 
pafled  an  act  for  difcharging  the  Yule  Vacance,  which 
was  repealed  after  the  union  by  ftat.  George  L  cap.  8. 
The  feaft  was  celebrated  from  time  immemorial  among 
the  Romans  and  Goths  ;  the  Chriftians  changed  its 
object  and  name  ;  tho  fuch  is  the  force  of  cuftom,  that 
the  Gothic  name  exifted  in  Scotland  till  lately,  and 
perhaps  ftill  cxifts  among  the  lower  ranks  of  people. 

FROM  the  northern  nations  alfo  we  have  the  names 
of  the  days  of  the  week:  ;  or  at  leaft  of  fome  of  them. 
The  ancient  Goths  devoted  particular  days  to  particu 
lar  deities* 

TUESDAY  was  Tyrflag,  from  Tyr  the  God  of 
bravery.  It  is  in  the  Danifh,  Tyrfda^  and  in  the  Swe- 
difh  Tijaag. 

WEDNESDAYS  Woden  flag,  from  Woden^  a  cele* 
brated  warrior  deified.  In  Icelandic,  it  is  Wonfdag  ;  in 
Swedifh,  Odlnfdag  ;  in  Dutch,  Woenfdag  ;  in  Anglo 
v  Wodenfdag. 

THURSDAY 


AND    CRITICAL. 


353 


THURSDAT  is  from  Thar,  god  of  the  air. 
Danifh  it  is  Thorfdag  ;  in  Swediih  Torfdag. 


In 


FRIDAY  is  from  Frea,  the  earth  and  goddefs  cf 
love>  anfwering  to  the  Venus  of  the  Greeks.     In  fome 
languages  it  is  called  Freytag. — —See  Mallet's  North. 
Antiquities. 
,  ''~^c 

I  WILL  juft  add,  it  is  a  weighty  argument  in  favor  of 
the  truth  of  the  Scripture  hiftory,  and  of  the  opinioa 
here  advanced  of  the  common  origin  of  languages,  that 
in  all  the  ancient  and  modern  European  alphabets,  the 
letters  are  of  a  (imilar  figure  arid  power,  and  arranged 
nearly  in  the  fame  order.*  The  true  Greek  letters 
were  only  the  Cadmean  letters  reverfed  :  This  reverfal 
took  place  early  in  Greece,  when  the  ancient  Phenician 
and  Hebrew  order  of  writing  from  right  to  left,  was 
changed  for  the  modern  order,  which  is  from  left  to 
right.  The  Hebrew  or  Phenician  Alphabet  was  clear 
ly  the  parent  of  the  Greek,  Roman  and  Gothic. 

[B,  page  52.] 

THE  reader  will  pleafe  to  accept  the  following 
fpecimen,  which  will  convey  an  idea  of  the  whole. 


Punic. 

YTH  al  o 
mm  ua  lon- 
uth  !  iicora- 
thifli  me  com 
fythchimlach 
chunyth  mum 
ys  tyal  mye- 
thi  barii  im 
fchi. 


Irljh. 

IATH  all  o 
nimh  uath  lon- 
naithe  !  focru- 
idhfe  me  com 
fith  chimi  lach 
chuinigh  !  mu- 
ini  iftoil  miocht 
beiridh  iar  mo 
fcith. 


Englifi. 

OMNIPOTENT, 
much  dreaded  Deity 
of  this  country  !  af- 
fwage  my  troubled 
mind  !  Thou,  the 
fupport  of  feeble  cap 
tives  !  being  now  ex- 
haufted  with  fatigue, 
of  thy  free  will,  guide 
me  to  my  children, 
IN 


and 


*  THE  Runic  excpptecL    The  Runic  letters  were  fixteen  in  number, 
d  introduced  very  early  into  the  North  ;;  but  they  went  cto  dlluf?  »• 
e  tenth  or  eleventn  centurv, 

Y 


354        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

IN  this  example  the  affinity  between  the  Punic  and 
Irifh  is  Unking  ,  and  the  faaie  runs  thfo  the  whole 
fpeech.  p 

THAT  Ireland  received  colonies  from  Spain  or  Car 
thage  is  probable  from  other  circumftances.  The  I- 
rifh  hiftorians  fay  their  anceftors  received  letters  from 
the  Phenicians  ;  and  the  Irifh  language  was  caJled 
Bearni  Feni,  the  Phenician  tongue.  Cadiz  in  Spain 
was  firft  fettled  by  Phenicians  5  and  cadas  in  Iri(h  fig- 
nifies  friendjhip. 

THE  Irifh  feems  to  be  a  compound  of  Celtic  arid  Pu 
nic  ;  arid  if  Ireland  was  peopled  originally  from  Car 
thage,  and  received  colonies  from  thence,  the  event 
xiiuft  have  been  fubfequent  tcr  the  firft  Punic  war  ;  for 
this  was  the  period  when  the  Carthaginians  adopted 
the  Roman  letters,  and  there  is  no  infcription  in  Ire 
land  in  the  Phenician  character. 

TH  E  Hebrew  was  the  root  of  the  Phenician  and  the 
Punic.  The  Maltefe .is  evidently  a  branch  of  the  Punic  ; 
for  it  approaches  nearer  to  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldaic, 
than  to  the  Arabic.  For  this  aflertion  we  have  the 
authority  of  M.  Mams,  profeflbr  of  the  Greek  and  o- 
riental  languages  in  the  Ludovician  univerfity  of  Gief- 
fen,  who  had  his  accounts  from  Ribier^  a  miflionary 
Jefuit  and  native  of  Malta.  This  fact  will  account  for 
the  correfpondence  between  the  Irifh  and  the  Maltefe, 
in  feveral  particulars.  In  Maltefe,  Alia  fignifies  God\ 
in  Irifh,  All  is  mighty.  Baol  in  Maltefe,  and  Bel  or  Bat 
in  Irifh,  fignify  Chief  Deity  ex  Sun.  In  Maltefe,  ardu 
is  end  or  fummit ;  in  Irim,  ard^  arda^  are  billy  high. 
Thefe  words  are  probably  from  the  fame  root  as  the 
Latin  ardutts^  and  the  Englifh  bard,  implying  labor. 
Bandla  in  Maltefe,  is  a  cord  ;  in  Irifh,  bann  is  fufperi- 
fion.  In  Maltefe,  gala  is  the  fail  of  a  fhip  ;  and  in  I- 
ri(h,  gal  is  a  gale  of  v;ind.  Thefe  Maltefe  words  are 
taken  from  a  Punica  Maltefe  Diclionary,  annexed  to  a 
treatife,  Delia  lingua  Punica  prefentamente  ufitate  da 
Maltefe,  by  G.  Pietro  Francifco  Agius  de  Solandas. 

THERE 


A  N  a    CRITICAL.       ,     353 

THERE  is  alfo  a  correfpondence  between  the  Irifh 
and  Punic,  in  the  variation  of  their  nouns,  as  may  be 
obferved  in  the  following  example. 

Punic.  Irijh. 

Nom.  A  dar,  the  houfe,  an  dae,  the  houfe,  &c. 

Gen,  Mit  a  dar,  of  the  houfe        mend  na  dae 
Dat.  La  dar,  with  or  to  the  houfe  la  dae 
Ace.  A  dar,  the  houfe  an  dae 

Voc.  Y'a  dar,  O  houfe  a  dae 

Abl.  Fa  dar,  with  or  by  the  houfe  fa  dae 

IN  feveral  particulars  the  Irifh  bears'  a  clofe  affinity 
to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek.  It  was  the  cuftom  with 
the  Hebrews,  and  it  Mill  remains  with  them,  to  face  the 
eaft  in  the  act  .of  devotion.  From  this  practice  it  pro 
ceeded,  that  the  fame  word  which  fignified  right  hand, 
iignined  alfofouth  ;  the  fame  with  left  hand  and  north  5 
before  and  eaft  \  behind  and  weft.  This  is  the  cafe  alfd 
m  the  Irifh  language. 

Hebrew.  Irijh. 

Jamin,^  right  hand,  fouth     deas,  the  fame 
Smol,  left  hand,  north         thuaidh,  the  fame 
Achor,  behind,  weft  tar,  the  fame 

Cedem,  before,  eaft  bir  and  oithear,  the  fame,  or 

rifingfun.     Latin,  criens. 

THAT  the  Greeks  had  an  intercourfe  with  the  iilands 
of  Britain  and  Ireland,  or  fent  colonies  thither,  is  not 
impoflible ;  and  Dr.  Todd,  not  many  years  ago,  difcov- 
ered,  at  Colchefter,  in  Effex,  an  altar  dedicated  to  the 
Tyrian  Hercules,  with  an  inicription  in  Greek  capitals, 

HPAKAHS    TYPED  AEIO   AOKA  APXIEPIA. 

THERE  is  a  place  in  Ireland  called  Airchil.  And  it 
is  a  remarkable  fac-1,  that  fome  fragments  of  old  I»itli 

laws, 


*  VENJAMIX  is  fon  of  the  right  hand. 

Y  a 


256        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

laws,  which,  for  a  long  time,  puzzled  the  antiquaries 
of  the  nation,  are  found  to  be  written  in  a  very  ancient 
language,  and  in  the  manner  which  the  Greeks  called 
Bottftrophedon  ;  that  is,  from  right  to  left,  and  from  left 
to  right,  in  the  manner  that  oxen  plow.  This  was 
fuppofed  to  be  an  improvement  on  the  Hebrew  and 
Phenician  order  of  writing  all  the  lines  from  right  to 
left,  which  Cadmus  introduced  into  Greece.  This 
manner  of  writing  in  Greece  was  prior  to  Homer,  and 
if  the  Irifh  copied  from  the  Greeks,  which  is  not  im- 
pofllble,  the  fact  would  prove  a  very  early  fettlement  of 
Ireland  by  Greek  colonies  or  their  descendants.  See 
Leland's  Hift.  of  Ireland,  Prelim.  Dif. 

ALL  thefe  circumftances  corroborate  the  opinion  that 
the  Celts  came  originally  from  the  eafl,  and  formed  fet- 
tlements  on  the  fhores  of  the  Mediterranean  and  At 
lantic.  The  affinity  between  the  Phenkian,  the  Punic,- 
the  Maltefe,  the  Irifh  and  the  Britifh  languages,  dif- 
coverable  in  a  great  number  of  words,  makes  it  proba 
ble,  that  after  colonies  were  fettled  at  Carthage  and  at 
Cadiz,  fome  commercial  intercourfe  was  carried  on  be 
tween  them  and  the  nations  at  the  head  of  the  Medi 
terranean,  and  that  an  emigration  from  Spain  might 
people  Ireland  before  any  fettlements  had  been  made 
there  by  the  GaiUs  or  Britons.  It  is  however  more 
probable  that  the  Punic  words  in  the  Irifh  language 
might  have  been  introduced  into  that  ifland  by  fubfe- 
quent  colonization.  At  any  rate,  from  the  Hebrew, 
Chaldaic,  or  Phenician,  or  the  common  root  of  thefe 
languages,  proceeded  the  Punic,  the  Maltefe,  the  Iberi 
an  or  Spanifh,  the  Gaulilh,  the  Britim,  and  the  Irifh. 
The  order  I  have  mentioned  is  obvious  and  natural ; 
and  hiftory  /urnifhes  us  with  fome  facts  to  ftrengthen 
the  fuppofition. 

[C,  page  58.] 

BISHOP  Hickes,  in  his  Saxon  Grammar,  which  is  a 
vail  treafure  of  valuable  learning,  has  preferved  a  fpeci- 


AND    CRITICAL.  357 

men  of  the  language  and  of  the  opinions  of  the  Eng- 
lUh  refpefting  it,  in  an  extract  from  a  manuicript  of 
one  Ranuiphus  Higdenus,  de  Incolarum  linguis,  tranilat- 
ed  by  John  Trevila  in  1385,  and  the  ninth  of  Richard 
II.  Trevifa's  ftile  bears  fome  affinity  to  that  of  Chau 
cer,  with  whom  he  was  cotemporary. 

"As  it  is  knowne  how  rneny  maner  peple  beeth  in 
this  land :  There  beeth  alfo  fo  many  dyvers  longages  and 
tongues.  Nathlefs,  Walfchemen  and  Scotts,  that  hath 
nought  medled  with  other  nations,  hokteth  wel  nyh  his 
firfte  langage  and  fpeeche  :  But  yif  the  Scottes  that  were 
fometime  confiderat  and  woned  with  the  Picts  draw 
fome  what  after  hir  i  fpeeche :  But  yif  the  Flemynges  that 
woneth  in  the  wefte  fide  of  Wales  haveth  left  her  ftrange 
fpeeche  and  fpekethlSexon  like  now.  Alfo  Englishmen, 
they  had  from  the  begynnynge  thre  maner  fpeeche,north- 
erne,  fowtherne,  and  middel  fpeeche  in  the  middle  of  the 
Jande,  as  they  come  of  thojnaner  peple  of  Germania, 
Nathlefs  by  comyxtion  and  mellynge  2;  f;rft  with 
and  afterwards  with  Normans,  in  meny  the  contray  la 
gageis  apayred  3  and  fom  ufeth  ftrong  wlafferynge^  chit- 
erynge,4  hartynge4  and  gartynge,^  griibayting  ;4  this 
apayryng  5  of  the  burthe  of  the  tunge  is  becaufe  of 
tweie  thinges  :  oqn  is  for  children  in  fcole,  agenft  the 
ufage  and  maner  of  all  other  nations,  beeth  compelled 
for  to  leve  hire  owne  langage,  and  for  to  confture  hir 
leflbns  and  here  6  thinges  in  Frenche  and  fo  they  hav 
eth  fethe  7  Normans  came  firfte  into  England.  Alfo 
gentilmen  children  beeth  taught  to  fpeke  Frenche  from 
the  tyme  that  they  beeth  rokked  in  hire  cradle  and  con- 
neth  8  fpeke  and  play  with  a  childes  brache  and  upland- 
iifche  meng  will  Ijkne  hymfelf  to  gentilmen  and  fond- 
eth  10  with  the  greet  befynefie  for  to  fpeke  Frenche  for 

to 

I.  THEIR.  2t  Mixture;  an  old  French  word,  now  written  me'sr^e* 
3  corrupted.  4  Thefe  words  reprefent  barbarity  and  roughnefs  in  ipeajc- 
jng.  5  Corrupcion  of  the  native  tongue.  6  hear  7  fince  8  know..  The 
Germans  preferve  the  verb  k&nneny  to  be  able.  The  pronouns  hir  and 
hire  for  their,  ftill  remain  in  the  German  ibr.  9  Country-people,  fo  called 
froin  diyir  living  on  the  mountains  or  high  lands 5  hence  cuiitindljb.  10  at 
tempt  * 


35B       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

to  be  told  of.  [Trevifa,  the  translator  remarks  here— ^ 
"  This  maner  was  moche  ufed  to,  for  firft  deth,u  and 
is  lithe  12  fum  del  13  changed.  For  John  Cornwaile, 
a  maifter  of  grammer,  changed  the  lore  14  in  grammer 
fcole  and  conftru&ion  of  Frenche  into  Englifhe-  And 
Richard  Peneriche  lerned  the  manere  techynge  of  him 
as  other  men,  of  Penriche.  So  that  now  the  yere  of 
our  Lorde  a  thoufand  thi  e  himdred  and  four  fcore  and 
iyve  and  of  the  fecond  king  Richard  after  the  conquefr, 
nyne  ;  and  alle  the  grammar  fcoles  of  England  chil 
dren  lernetri  Frenche  and  conftrueth  and  lerneth  an 
tnglidie  and  haveth  thereby  advantage  in  oon  fide, 
and  difadvantage  in  another  fide.  Here  15  advantage  is 
that  they  lerneth  hir  grammer  in  lafle  tyme,  than  chil 
dren  were*wonned  to  doo.  Difadvantage  is,  that  now 
children  of  grammer  fcole  conneth  na  more  Frenche 
than  can  hir  lift  bee!e^i6  and  that  is  harme  for  hem  an 
they  fchullei^  pafTe  the  fee  and  travaille  in  ftrange 
londes  and  in  many  other  places.  Alfo  gentilmen  hav- 
.  eth  now  moehe  left  for  to  teche  here  children  Frenche."] 
'  Ranulpbus. — Hit  feemeth  a  great  wonder  how  Englifhe 
men  and  her  18  own  longage  and  tongue  is  fo  dyverfe 
of  fown  in  this  oqn  ilande,  and  the  longage  of  Norman- 
die  is  comlynge  19  of  another  lande  and  hath  oon  maner 
foun  among  all  men  that  fpeketh  hit  arigt  in  England. 
[Trevifa's  remark — u  Neverthelefs  there  is  as  many 
diverfe  maner  Frenche  in  the  reeme2o  of  France,  as  is 
dyvers  maner  Engli(he  in  the  reeme  of  England."] 
.&.  Alfo  of  the  atbrefaid  Saxon  tonge  that  js  eleledii 
athree  and  is  abide  fcarceliche22  with  few  uplandilhe 
men,  is  great  wonder.  For  men  of  the  eft  with  men 
of  the  wcit  is  as  it  were  under  the  fame  partie  of  hevene 
accordeth  more  in  fownynge  of  .fpeeche  than  men  of 
the  north  with  men  of  the  louth.  Therefore  it  is  thut 

Mercii, 

•femnt  with  cngernefs.  n  time.  12  JJthe  is  the  origin  of  fince. 
1")  Del  jj^n'.iies  *f-art  or  division  ;  it  is  from  the  verb  det'ler  to  divide,  an,d 
the'  roc  L  of  tht-  En^liih  word  deal.  JJaler\s  pteierved  in  the  Daniili, 
14  icarning.  15  their.  16  In  the  original  theie  words  are  obfcure. 
jylhis  is  fro.-,'  the  verb  Jo/ien,  implying  obligation,  duty.  18  th«if. 
39  foici^n  j  Lat.  aj^eva.  2Q  rt^im.  3,1  divided,  £2  Scarcely. 

•£$  hardly e  .'J 


AND    CRITICAL.  359 

Mercii,  that  beeth  men  of  myddel  England,  as  it  were, 
parteners  of  the  endes,  underflandeth  bettrie  the  fide  Ion- 
gages  than  northerne  and  foutherne  underftandeth  either 
other.  All  the  longage  of  the  Northumbers  and  fpe- 
cialliche  at  York,  is  fo  fcharp,  flitting  and  frotynge  and 
unfchape  that  the  foutherne  men  may  that  longage 
unnethe23  underftande.  I  trow  that  is  becaufe  that  they 
beeth  nyh  to  ftrange  men  and  nations,  that  fpeketh 
ftrongliche,  and  alfo  becaufe  the  kinges  of  Englande 
woneth24  alway  fer25  from  that  contray,  for  they 
beeth  more  turned  to  the  fouth  contray,  and  yif  they 
goeth  to  the  northe  contray,  they  goeth  with  great  helpe 
and  ftrengthe.  The  caufe  why  they  beeth  more  in  the 
fouthe  contray  than  in  the  northe,  for  it  may  be  better 
corn  londe,  more  peple,  more  noble  cities,  and  more 
profitable  havenes."* 

ON  this  pafiage  we  may  make  the  following  re 
marks  : 

i.  THAT  the  third  perfon  fingular  of  the  verb  is  in 
variably  ufed  with  plural  as  well  as  fingular  nouns  ;  they 
beeth^  haveth.  Whereas  in  Chaucer  and  Mandeville 
the  fame  perfon  ends  generally  in  en  ;  theyfeyn  for  they 
fay. 

THE  fame  third  perfon  was  ufexl  for  the  imperative, 
by  the  beft  Englifh  writers. 

"  AND  foft  take  me  in  your  armes  tvrey, 
JFor  love  of  God,  and  bearkenetb  what  I  fey." 
Chaucer,  Knight's  Tale,  2783. 

"  AND  at  certyn  houres,  they  feyn  to  certyn  offices, 
maketh  pees  3"  that  is,  makepeace. — Mandeville,  p.  281. 

2.  THAT 

33  hardly.    24  dvvelleth.    25  far. 

*  I  TIN  D  in  an  c<  Eflay  on  the  language  and  verification  of  Chaucer" 
prefixed  to  Bell's  edition  of  his  works,  part  of  thib  extrad  copied  from 
a  Harlein  manuicript,  faid  to  be  more  correft  than  the  manufcript  from 
which  Dr.  Hickes  copied  it.  But  on  comparing  the  extracts  in  both,  J 
tut  Verbal  4;fferences  j  the  fenie  of  both  is  the  fame. 


360       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

/ 

2.  THAT  yifis  ufed  for  if;  a  proof  that  if  is  a  verb, 
a  contraction  of  giforyif(for  they  were  ufed  promif- 
cuoufly)  the  imperative  of  gifan^  to  give.* 


3.  THAT  the  fubjun&ive  form  of  verbs  was  not  ufe4 
after  if\  and  y  if  they  goetb  to  the  norths  contray. 

4.  THAT  there  were  three  principal  diale&s  in  th$ 
Englilh  ;  the>z0rf/?mz,  which  wa's  corrupted  by  the  Scots 
and  Pi6b,  and  from  which  the  prefent  Yorkshire  lan 
guage  is  derived  ;  the  middle,  which  came  from  Ger 
many  and  retained  its  primitive  purity,  and  is  the  true 
parent  of  modern  Engljih  ;  and  the  joutkern,  by  which 
is  nreant,  either  the  language  of  t^ie  (outhern  parts 
which  was  corrupted  by  an  intercourfe  with  foreigners; 
or  what  is  more  probable,  the  language  fpoken  in  Dev- 
cnfhire,  and  on  the  borders  of  Cornwal,  which  wa$. 
mixed  with  the  old  Britifti,  and  is  now  almoft  unintel 
ligible. 

5.  THAT  the  conquefts  of  the  Danes  and  Norman^ 
had  corrupted  the  pure  language  of  the  Saxons. 

6.  THAT 

*  IN  a  charter  of  fldward  III.  dated  134?,  yevcn  is  ufed  for  given. 
Tave  for  gave  is  ufed  by  Chaucer.—  Knight's  1  ale,  line  2737.  "  And 
yamc  hem  giftes  after  his  degreet11  In  'a  charter  of  Edward  the  Confeffbr, 
gifis  ufed  in  its  Saxon  purity.  In  the  fame  charter,  BiJJop  his  land,  ir, 
ufed  for  a  genitive.  The  Scotch  wrote  x  for  y  ;  zir  for  yet  $  zeres  toi- 
years.—  Douglafs.  -I  do  not  find,  at  this  period,  tHe  true  Saxon  genitive 
in  ufe  :  The  BiJJop  bh  land,  is  deemed  an  error.  This  mode  of  fpeak- 
ing  has  however  prevailed,  till  within  a  few  years,  atid  ftill  has  its  advo 
cates.  But  it  is  certain  the  Saxons  had  a  proper  termination  for  the 
genitive  or  poiTdfive,  which  is  preserved  in  the  two  firft  declenfions  of 
the  German. 


of  the  decJenfidn  of  nouns  among  the  Saxons, 

A  WORD. 

Stag.  Flu. 

Nom.     Word  word 

Gen.     Wordes  worda 

Dat.       Worde  Wordum 

Ace.      Word  word 

Voc.      Eala  thu  word  eaia  ge  word 

Worde,  vordum 

*.  Hickes  Sax.  Gram« 


A  N  p    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L,  361 

6.  THAT  this  corruption  proceeded  principally  from 
the  teaching  of  French  in  fchools. 

7.  THAT  country  people,  (uplandifh  men)  imitated 
the  jpradice  of  the  polite,  and  learnt  French,  as  many 

to  be  toldrf. 


8.  THAT  Cornwall  and  others,  in  Trevifa's  time, 
Had  begun  to  reform  this  practice. 

9.  THAT  French  had  almoft  baniflied  the  native 
Saxon  from  the  polite  part  of  the  nation,  and  that  the 
tiplandijh  or  weitern  people  alone  retained  it  uncorrupted, 

10.  THAT  the  Kings  of  England  refided  principally 
in  the  fouthern  parts  of  the  kingdom,  where  the  land 
was  moft  fertile,  beft  cultivated,  moft  populous,  and 
molt  advantageous  for  commerce, 

[D,  page  59.] 

CHAUCER's  particular  patron  was  John  of  Gaunt, 
Duke  of  Laneafter.  He  married  Philippa,  the  fitter  of 
Lady  Swinford,  who  before  her  marriage  and  after  her 
huiband's  death,  was  one  of  the  Duke's  family. 

"CRETE  well  Chaucer  when  you  mete—» 
Of  dittees  and  of  fonges  glade,  » 

The  which  he  -  made 
The  londe  fulfilled  is  over  all." 
.  Gower. 

QOWER  is  faid  to  have  been  Chaucer's  preceptor* 

*c  MY  maifter  C£<2tt^r-—chiefe  poet  of  Bretayne 
Whom  all  this  lond  fhould  of  right  prefetre, 
Sith  of  our  language  he  was  the  lodejiarret 
That  made  firft  to  dyftyUe-and  rayhe 
The  gold  dew  dropys  of  fpeche  and  eloquence 
Into  our  tungue  through  his  excellence." 
Lydgate. 

CHAUCER'S  merit  in  improving  the  Englifh  lan 
guage  is  celebrated  by  other  poets  of  his  time—  Occleve, 

Douglas 


362        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

Douglas  and  Dunbar.     They  call  him  \hefoure  of  elo 
quence^  the  fader  in  ]ciencey  and  the  firfle  fyndtr  of  our 
fayrc  langage. 

HE  died  in  1400. 

IT  muft  however  be  remarked  that  Chaucer  did  not 
import  foreign  words,  fo  much  as  introduce  them  into 
books  and  give  them  currency  in  writing.  It  muft  fur 
ther  be  obferved  that  when  I  fpeak  of  the  incorporation 
of  Latin  words  with  the  Englifh,  I  would  not  be  under- 
ilood  to  mean  that  words  were  taken  directly  from  the 
Roman  tongue  and  anglicifed.  On  the  other  hand, 
they  moftly  came  thro  the  channel  of  the  Norman  or 
Provencal  French  ;  and  perhaps  we  may  call  them, 
with  propriety  French  words  ;  for  they  had  loft  much 
of  their  Roman  form  among  the  Gauls,  Franks  anc| 
Normans. 

THE  moft  correct  account  I  have  feen  of  the  ftate  of 
the  language  in  the  nth,  iath,  I3th  and  i4th  centu 
ries,  is  in  the  firft  volume  of  Bell's  edition  of  Chaucer. 

WE  Jiaye  the  authority  of  Ingulphus,  a  hiftorian  of 
credit,  for  alleging  that  the  French  began  to  be  fafhion- 
able  in  England,  before  the  conqueft.  Edward  the 
ConfeiTor  refided  many  years  in  Normandy,  and  im 
bibed  a  predilection  for  the  French  manners  and  lan 
guage.  On  his  acceffion  to  the  throne  of  England,  ir* 
1043,  he  promoted  many  of  his  Norman  favorites  to 
the  lirft  dignities  in  the  kingdom  ;  under  the  influence 
of  the  king  and  his  friends,  the  Englifh  began  to  imi 
tate  the  French  fashions. 

BUT  the  conqueft  in  1066,  completed  the  change. 
The  court  of  William  confifted  principally  of  foreigners 
who  could  fpeak  no  language  but  French.  Moft  of  the 
high  offices  and  rich  livings  in  the  kingdom  were  filled 
with  Normans,  and  the  caftles  which,  by  order  of  the 
conqueror,  were  built  in  different  parts  of  the  country, 

were 


A  N  D    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L,  363 

were  garrifoned  by  foreign  foldiers,  in  whom  the  king 
might  moft  fafely  confide.*  Public  bufmefs  was  tranf- 
acted  in  the  French,  and  it  became  difhonorable  or  a 
mark  of  low  breeding,  not  to  underftand  that  language. 
Indeed  under  the  firft  reigns  after  the  conqueft,  it  was 
a  difgrace  to  be  called  an  Engtijbman.  In  this  deprefled 
flate  of  the  Ene^lifh,  their  language  could  not  fail  to  be 
neglected  by  the  polite  part  of  the  nation. 

BUT  as  the  body  of  the  nation  .did  not  underftand 
French,  there  muft  have  been  a  conftant  effort  to  root 
it  out  and  eftablifh  the  English.  The  latter  however 
gained  ground  {lowly  during  the  two  firfl  centuries  of 
the  revolution.  But  in  the  reign  of  king  John,  Nor 
mandy,  which  had  been  united  with  England  under  the 
Norman  princes,  was  taken  by  the  French,  1205,  and 
thus  feparated  from  the  Britilh  dominions.  In  the 
next  reign  (Henry  III.)  fqme  regulations  were  made 
between  the  two  kingdoms,  by  which  the  fubjects  of  ei 
ther  were  rendered  incapable  of  holding  lands  in  the 
other.  Thefe  events  muft  have  retained,  in  fome 
degree,  the  intercourfe  between  the  two  kingdoms,  and 
given  the  Englifh  an  opportunity  to  aflume  their  own 
native  character  and  importance*  In  this  reign  the 
Englifh  began  to  value  themfelves  upon  their  birth,  and 
a  knowlege  of  the  Englifh  language  was  a  recommend 
ation,  tiio  not  a  requiSte,  in  a  candidate  for  a  benefice. 

IT  appears  alfo  by  the  paflage  of  Higden  before  quot- 
^d,  that  the  practice  of  conftruing  Latin  into  French, 
in  the  fchools,  had  clofed  before  his  time.  This,  with 
the  other  caufes  before  afligned,  contributed  to  root  out 
the  French,  and  make  the  Englifh  reputable  ;  and  in 
the  reign  of  Edward  III.  produced  the  acl,  mentioned 
in  the  text,  in  favor  of  the  Englifh.  This  act  did  not 
produce  a  total  change  of  practice  at  once  ;  for  we  rind 
the  proceedings  in  parliament  were  publifhed  in  French 

for 

*  CUSTODES  in  caftellis  ftrenuos  viros  $x  Gall's  coMocavit,  et  opn- 
Jenta  beneiicia,  pro  quibus  iabores  et  pericula  Jibcnter  tolera  rent,  diitn- 
bait.— —  Oideric.  Vital,  lib.  4. 


364       NOTES,     HISTORICAL 

for  fixty  years  after  the  pleas  in  courts  were  ordered  to 
be  in  Englifh,  and  the  ftatutes  continued  in  French  a- 
bout  120  years  after  the  aft,  till  the  firft  of  Richard  III. 

IT  may  be  obferved  that  the  royal  aflent  to  bills  was 
in  fome  iriftances  given  in  Englifh  during  the  reign  of 
Henry  VI.  Be  it  ordained  as  it  is  ajked  :  Be  it  as  it  is 
(ixtd.*  But  the  royal  aflent  is  now  declared  in  French. 

[E,  page  66  and  34.] 

SIR  William  Temple's  ftile,  tho  eafy  and  flowing, 
is  too  difFufe  :  Every  page  of  his  abounds  with  tautol 
ogies.  Take  the  following  fpecimen  from  the  nrfl 
page  that  prefents  itfelf  on  opening  his  third  volume. 


the  furvey  of  thefe  difpofiticns  in  mankind 
and  thefe  conditions  of  government,  it  feems  much 
more  reafonable  to  pity  than  to  envy  \hvfvrtvnet  and 
dignities  of  princes  or  great  minifters  offlate  ;  and  to 
leffen  and  excufe  their  venial  faults,  or  at  leaft  their  mif- 
fortunes,  rather  than  to  encreafe  and  make  them  ivorfe  by 
ill  colors  and  reprefentations."  -  Of  Pop.  Dif. 

•  FORTUNES  and  dignities  might  have  been  better 
Cxprefled  by  elevated  rank  or  high  Rations  ;  great  is  fu- 
perfluous,  and  fo  are  leffen  and  make  them  worfe^  and  ei 
ther  colors  or  reprefentations  might  have  been  omitted. 

*'  THE  6rft  fafety  of  princes  zndjtates  lies  in  avoiding 
all  councils  or  defigns  of  innqvation,  in  ancient  and  fftab- 
lijhed  forms  and  laws,  efpecially  thofe  concerning  liberty, 
property  and  religion  (which  are  the  poiTefiions  men 
will  ever  have  moll  at  heart  ;)  and  thereby  leaving  th« 
channel  of  known  and  common  juftice  clear  and  undtf- 
iurbed."  Several  words  might  here  be  retrenched,  and 
yet  leave  the  atjthqr's  meaning  more  preciie  and  in 
telligible.  This  is  the  principal  fault  in  Temple's  ftije, 

"Bur 

*  THE  word  ax  for  ajk  is  not  a  modern  corruption.    It  was  an  ancieai 
dialed,  i»nd  not  yulgar* 


A  i*  B    C  R  I  T~I  C  A  L.  365 

**BuT  men,  accuftomed  to  the  free  and  vagrant  life 
of  hunters,  are  incapable  of  regular  application  to  la 
bor  ;  and  confider  agriculture  as  nfecondary  and  inferior 
occupation."—— Robertfon's  Hift.  Amer.  book  4. 

SUPPOSING  Jecondary  and  inferior  not  to  be  exaclly 
fynonimous,  in  this  fenteince  <>ne  would  have  anfwered 
the  purpofe. 

«  AGRICULTURE,  even  when  the  ftrength  of  mart 
is  feconded  by  that  of  the  animals  which  he  has  fubjetted. 
to  the  yoke,  and  his  power  augmented  by  the  uje  of  the 
'Various  mftruments  with  which  the  difcovery  of  metals 

has  furnimed  him,  is  dill  a  work  of  great  labor." - 

The  fame. 

THIS  fentence  is  very  exceptionable.  •  Is  agriculture^ 
a  work  ?  Can  fo  definite  a  term  be  applied  to  fuch  a 
general  idea  ?  But  what  a  group  of  ufelefs  words  follow  ! 
It  was  not  fufficient  to  fay,  the  Jlrength  of  man  feconded 
by  that  of  animals,  but  the  kinds  of  animals  muft  be  fpe- 
cified  ;  viz.  fuch  as  he  has  fubjetted  to  the  yoke  $  when 
every  perfon  knows  that  other  animals  are  never  ufed  ; 
and  confequently  the  author's  idea  would  have  been 
fufficiently  explicit  without  that  fpecification.  In  the 
fubfequent  claufe,  the  words,  his  power  augmented  by  the 
ufe  of  the  various  injlruments  of  metal,  would  have  been 
explicit ;  for  the  difcovery  of  metals  muft  have  been  im 
plied.  Such  expletive  words  load  the  mind  with  a 
chain  of  particular  ideas  which  are  not  effential  to  the 
cfcfcourfe. 

" — AND  if  any  one  of  thefe  prognoses  is  deemed 
•unfavorable,  they  inftantly  abandon  the  purfuit  of  thofe 

meafures,  on  which  they  are  mojl  eagerly  beniS* The 

fame. 

HERE  is  an  awkward  concluHon  of  the  period,  and 
afcribeable  to  a  too  nice  regard  for  grammatical  rules. 
They  are  moft  eagerly  bent  on,  would  perhaps  have  beett 

better 


2,66        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

better  ;  but  a  different  conftru&ion  would  have  been 
ftill  lefs  exceptionable.  There  is  however  a  greater 
fault  in  the  conftruclion.  By  employing  tbofe  and 
moft  eagerly,  the  idea  is,  that  favages,  on  the  appearance 
of  unfavorable  omens,  would  abandon  tbofe  meafures 
only,  on  which  they  are  moft  eagerly  bent,  and  not  others 
that  they  might  be  purfuing  with  lefs  earneftnefs. 
Why  could  not  the  author  have  faid  in  plain  Englim — 
"  they  inftantly  abandon  any  meafure  they  are  purfu 
ing." 

THIS  writer's  ftile  likewife  abounds  with  fynoriims  ; 
V&ftrtngthen  and  confirm,  quicken  and  animate  ;  whea 
one  term  would  fully  exprefs  the  meaning.  "  Strong 
liquors  awake  a  favage  from  his  torpid  flate — -give  a 
brifker  motion  to  hisfpirits,  and  enliven  him  more  thor 
oughly  than  either  dancing  on  gaming.'* Book  4. 

What  a  neecilefs  repetition  of  the  fame  idea  !  The  au 
thor  is  alfo  very  liberal  in  the  ufe  of  all — "  all  the 
tranfports  and  frenzy  of  intoxication." — "  War,  which 
Between  extenfive  kingdoms,  is  carried  on  with  little  an- 
imbfity,  is  profecuted  by  fmall  tribes,  with  all  the  ran 
cor  of  a  private  quarrel. " 

IN  Ihort,  theftiieof  Dr,  Robertfon,  the  great,  the 
philofophic  hiftorian,  is  too  labored.  The  mind  of  the 
reader  is  kept  conftantly  engaged  in  attending  to  the 
ftrufture  of  the  periods  ;  it  is  fatigued  with  words  and 
drawn  from  the  chain  of  events. 

THE  ftile  of  Kaims,  tho  not  eafy  and  flowing,  is 
precife,  and  generally  accurate.  The  ftile  of  Blair's 
Lectures  is  lefs  correct  than  that  of  his  Sermons  ;  but 
at  the  fame  time,  lefs  formal  in  the  ftru&ure  of  the  pe 
riods. 

THESE  remarks,  the  reader  will  obferve,  refpeft  ftile 
only  ;  for  the  merit  of  Robertfon,  as  a  judicious  and 
faithful  hiftorian  ;  and  of  Kaims  and  Blair,  as  critics, 
is  above  praife  or  cenfure. 


A  N  D  c  R  i  T  i  e  A  L;          357 

.  IN  no  particular  is  the  falfe  tafte  of  the  English  more 
obvious,  than  in  the  promifcuous  encomiums  they  have 
beftowed  on  Gibbon,  as  a  hiftorian.  His  work  is 
not  properly  a  "  Hiftory  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire  j"  but  a  "Poetico-Hiftorical  Defcrip- 
tion  of  certain  Perfons  and  Events,  embellifhed  with 
fuitable  imagery  and  epifodes,  defigned  to  ihow  the  au 
thor's  talent  in  felefting  words,  as  well  as  to  delight 
the  ears  of  his  readers."  In  ftiort,  his  hiftory  fhould 
be  entitled,  "  A  Difplay  of  Words  ;"  except  fome 
chapters  which  are  excellent  commentaries  on  the 
hiftory  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

THE  general  fault  of  this  author  is,  he  takes  more 
pains  to  form  his  fentences,  than  to  collect^  arrange  and 
exprefs  the  facls  in  an  eafy  and  perfpicuous  manner. 
In  confequence  of  attending  to  ornament,  he  feems  to 
forget  that  he  is  writing  for  the  information  of  his  read 
er,  and  -when  he  ought  to  inftruft  the  ?nindt  he  is  only 
pkafing  the  ear.  Fully  poflefled  of  his  fubjecl:,  he  de- 
fcribes  things  and  events  in  general  terms  or  figurative 
language,  which  leave  upon  the  mind  a  faint  evanefcent 
impreilion  of  fome  indeterminate  idea  ;  fo  that  the 
reader,  not  obtaining  a  clear  precife  knovvlege  of  the 
fa&s,  finds  it  difficult  to  underftand,  and  impoffible  to 
recollect,  the  author's  meaning.  Let  a  man  read  his 
volumes  with  the  moft  laborious  attention,  and  he  will 
find  at  the  clofe  that  he  can  give  very  little  account  of 
the  "  Roman  Empire  ;"  but  he  will  remember  per 
fectly  that  Gibbon  is  a  moft  elegant  writer. 

HISTORY  is  capable  of  very  little  embelllfhrnent ; 
tropes  and  figures  are  the  proper  inftruments  of  eloquence 
and  declamation  ;  fafls  only  are  the  fubjects  of  hiftory, 
Reflections  of  the  author  are  admitted  ;  but  thefe  ftiould 
not  be  frequent  j  for  the  reader  claims  a  right  to  his 
own  opinions.  The  juftnefs  of  the  hiftorian's  remarks 
may  be  called  in  queftion — fafts  only  are  inconteftible. 
The  plain  narative  of  the  Scripture 'hiftorians^  and  of 
Herodotus,  with  their  dialogues  and  digrefTions,  is  as 

far 


363      NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

far  fuperior,  confidered  as  pure  hiftory,  to  the  affecled 
glaring  brilliancy  of  ftile  and  manner,  which  runs  thro 
Gibbon's  writings,  as  truth  is  to  ficliori  ;  or  the  ver- 
million  blufh  of  nature  and  innocence,  to  the  artificial 
daubings  of  famion.  The  iirft  never  fails  to  affect  the 
heart — the  laft  can  only  dazzle  the  fenfes. 

ANOTHER  Fault  in  Gibbon's  manner  of  writing,  is^ 
the  ufe  of  epithets  or  titles  inftead  of  names.  "  The  Caefar, 
the  conqueror  of  the  eaft,  the  protector  of  the  church, 
the  country  of  the  Caefars,  the  fon  of  Leda,"  and  innu- 
inerable  fimilar  appellations  are  employed,  inftead  of  the 
real  names  of  the  perfons  and  places  ;  and  frequently 
at  fuch  a  diftance  from  any  mention  of  the  name,  that 
the  reader  is  obliged  to  turn  over  a  leaf  and  look  for  an 
explanation.  Many  of  the  epithets  are  new  j  cuftom 
has  not  made  us  familiar  with  them  ;  they  have  never 
been  fubftituted,by  common  confent,  for  the  true  names; 
the  reader  is  therefore  furprized  with  une£pe6ted  ap 
pellations,  and  conftantly  interrupted  to  find  the  perfons 
or  things  to  which  they  belong. 

I  AM  not  about  to  write  a  lengthy  criticifm  on  this 
author's  hiftory  ;  a  few  paflages  only  will  be  felected 
as  proofs  of  what  I  have  advanced.  "Decline  and 
Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  vol.  3*  oft.  chap.  17  :  In 
explaining  the  motives  of  the  Emperors  for  removing  the 
feat  of  government  from  Rome  to  the  Eaft,  the  author 
fays — "  Rome  was  infenfibly  confounded  with  the  de 
pendent  kingdoms  which  had  once  acknowleged  her 
fupremacy  ;  and  the  country  of  the  Cafars  was  viewed 
•with  cold  indifference  by  a  martial  prince,  born  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Danube,  educated  in  the  courts 
and  armies  of  Afia,  and  inverted  with  the  purple  by  the 
legions  of  Britain."  By  the  author's  beginning  one 
part  of  the  fentence  with  Romey  and  the  other  with  the 
country  of  the  Cesfars,  the  reader  is  led  to  think  two  dif 
ferent  places  are  intended,  for  he  has  not  a  fufpicion  of 
a  tautology.-,  or  at  leafl  he  fuppofes  the  author  ufes  the 
country  of  the  Ctfars  in  a  more  extenfive  fenfe  than 

Rome* 


A  N  f>    CRITICAL.  569 

"  &omf.  He  therefore  looks  back  and  reads  perhaps  half 
a  page  with  a  clofer  attention,  and  finds  that  the  writer 
is  fpeaking  of  the  feat  of  empire^  and  therefore  can  mean 
the  city  of  Rome  only.  After  this  trouble  he  is  difpleaf- 

•  ed  that  the  author  has  employed  five  words  to  fvvell  and 
adorn  his  period.  This  however  is  not  the  only  diffi^ 
culty  in  underftanding  the  author.  Who  is  the  martial 
prince  ?  In  the  preceding  fentence,  Diocletian  is  men 
tioned,  as  withdrawing  from  Rome ;  and  in  the  fentence 
following,  Conftantine  is  faid  to  vifit  Rome  but  feldom. 
The  reader  then  is  left  to  collect  the  author's  meaning, 
by  the  circumftances  of  the  birth,  education  and  elec 
tion  of  this  martial  prince.  If  he  is  poflefTed  of  thefe 
facts  already>  he  may  go  on  without  much  tFouble. 

THE  author's  affectation  of  ufing  the  purple  for  the 
crown  or  imperial  dignity,  is  fo  obvious  by  numberlefs 
repetitions  of  the  word,  as  to  be  perfectly  ridiculous. 

"  IN  the  choice  of  an  advantageous  fituation,  he  pre 
ferred  the  confines  of  Europe  and  Afia  ;  to  curb,  with  a 
powerful  arrn^  the  barbarians  who  dwelt  between  the 
Danube'  and  Tanais  ;  to  watch,  with  an  eye  of  jealoufy, 
the  conduct  of  the  Perfian  monarch."  Here  the  mem 
bers  of  the  fentence  in  Italics,  are  altogether  fuperflu- 
ous  ;  the  author  wanted  to  inform  his  reader,  that  Dio- 
clefian  defigned  to  curb  the  barbarians  and  watch  the 
Perfian  monarch  ;  for  which  purpofe  he  chofe  a  favor 
able  fituation  ;  but  it  was  wholly  immaterial  to  the 
fubject  to  relate  in  what  manner  or  degree,  the  empe^ 
ror  meant  to  exert  his  arm  or  his  jealoufy.  Nay  more, 
thefe  are  circumftances  which  are  not  reduceable  to  any 
certainty,  and  of  which  the  writer  and  the  reader  can 
have  no  precife  idea. 

"WiTH  thefe  views,  Dloclefian  had  felected  and 
embellifhed  the  refidence  of  Nicomedia" — Is  Nicomedia 
a  princefs,  whofe  refidence  the  emperor  felected  and 
embellifhed  ?  This  is  the  moft  obvious  meaning  of  the 
fentence.  But  Nicomedia,  we  learn  from  other  paffa- 
3  ges, 


370        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

ges,  was  a  city,  the  refidence  itfelf  of  the  emperor.  Yet 
the  author  could  not  tell  us  this  in  a  few  plain  words, 
without  fpoiling  the  harmony  of  the  phrafe  ;  he  chofe 
therefore  to  leave  it  obfcure  and  ungrammatical. 

" — BUT  the  memory  of  Dioclefian  was  juftly  abhor 
red  by  the  Proteflor  of  the  Church  ;  and  Conjiantine  was 
not  infcnfible  to  the  ambition  of  founding  a  city,  which 
might  perpetuate  the  glory  of  his  own  name."  Who 
is  the  protestor  of  the  church  ?  By  Conftantine's  being 
mentioned  immediately  after,  one  would  think  he  can 
not  be  the  perfon  intended  ;  yet  on  examination,  this 
is  found  to  be  the  cafe.  But  why  this  feparate  appel 
lation  ?  it  feems  the  author  meant  by  it  to  convey  this 
idea  ;  That  Dioclefian  was  a  perfecutor  of  the  church, 
therefore  his  memory  was  abhorred  by  Conftantine  who 
•was  its  protector  ;  the  caufe  of  Conftantine's  abhorrence 
'is  implied,  and  meant  to  be  unfolded  to  the  reader,  in 
a  iingle  epithet.  Is  this  hiftory  ?  I  muft  have  the  lib 
erty  to  think  that  fuch  terfenejs  of  ftile,  notwithstanding 
the  authorities  of  Tacitus  and  Gibbon,  is  a  grofs  cor 
ruption  and  a  capital  fault. 

IN  defcrlption,  our  author  often  indulges  a  figurative 
poetical  manner,  highly  improper. 

"  THE  figure  of  the  imperial  city  (Conftantinople) 
may  be  reprefented  under  that  of  an  unequal  triangle. 
The  obtufe  point,  which  advances  towards  the  eaft, 
and  the  fhores  of  Afia,  meets  and  repels  the  waves  of 
the  Thracian  Bofphorus."  Here  the  author  foars  on 
poetic  wings,  and  we  behold  the  obtufe  point  of  a  triangle, 
marching  eaftward,  attacking  and  repulfing  its  foes,  the 
waves  of  the  Bofphorus  ;  in  the  next  line,  the  author 
fmks  from  the  heights  of  Parnaflus,  and  creeps  on  the 
plain  offimplenarative — "  The  northern  fide  of  the  city 
is  bounded  by  the  harbor." 

"  ON  thefe  banks,  tradition  long  preferved  the  mem 
ory  of  the  fylvan  reign  of  Amycus,  who  defied  the  fort- 


• 


AND    CRITICAL.  371 

ef  Leda  to  the  combat  of  the  Ceftus."  The  authop 
takes  it  for  granted  that  his  reader  is  acquainted  with  all 
the  ancient  fables  of  Greece  and  Rome.  Such  allufrms 
to  fads  or  fables  make  a  wretched  figure  in  fober  hif- 
tj>ry* 

THE  author,  after  the  manner  of  the  poets,  admits 
epifodes  into  his  defcriptions,  by  way  of  variety  and 
embellimment.  He,  begins  a  defcription  of  Conftanti- 
nople  j  to  do  juftice  to  the  city,  he  muft  deicribe  its  fit- 
uation  ;  he  therefore  gives  an  account  of  the  Thraciars 
Bofphorus,  the  Propontus  and'  Hellefpont,  interfperfed 
with  ancient  fables,  and  adorned  with  poetical  imagery. 
When  he  arrives  at  the  mouth  of  the  Hellefpont,  his 
fancy  leads  him  to  the  feat  of  ancient  Troy,  and  he 
cannot  pafs  it,  without  telling  us  from  Homer,  where 
the  Grecian  armies  were  encamped;  where  the  flanks 
of  the  army  were  guarded  by  Agamemnon's  brav- 
eft  chiefs  ;  where  Achilles  and  his  myrmidons  oc 
cupied  a  jpromontory  ;  where  Ajax  pitched  his  teat  ; 
aud  where  his  tomb  was  ereited  after  his  death.  After 
indulging  his  fancy  on  this  memorable  field  of  heroic 
actions,  he  is  qualified  to  defcribe  Conftantinople. 

BUT  it  is  needlefs  to  multiply  examples  ;  for  fimilar  - 
faults  occur  in  almoft  every  page.  Moil  men,  who 
have  read  this  hiftory,  perceive  a  difficulty  in  urider- 
flanding  it  5  yet  few  have  attempted  to  find  the  reafon  ; 
and  hardly  a  man  has  dared  to  ceaiure  the  ftile  and 
manner. 

To  what  caufe  then  mail  we  afcribe  the  almoft  u- 
nanimous  confent  of  the  Englifh  and  Americans,  in 
lavishing  praifes  upon  Gibbon's  hiiiory  ?  In  fome  meaf- 

ure 

*  So  Gillies,  in  his  Hift.  of  Greece,  chap.  II.  talks  about  the  death 
of  the  "friend  of  Achilles  ;"  but  leaves  the. reader  to  difco.ver  the  per- 
fon — not  having  once  mentioned  the  nAme  ofPatroclus.  I  vvou!d  obferve 
further  that  fuch  appellations  as  the  Jon  cf  Leda  are  borrowed  from  the 
Greek  ;  but  wholly  improper  in  our  language,  i  he  Greeks  had  a  dii- 
tmcl  ending  of  the  name  of  the  father  to  fi^nify  fon  or  defcendants  j  as 
Herac/iaa.  This  form  of  the  noun  was  knewn  and  had  a  definite  mean 
ing  in  Greece  j  but  in  Engliih  the  idiom  is  awkward  and  erab* 
%  2 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

tire  doubtlefs  to  the  greatnefs  of  the  attempt,  and  the 
want  of  an  Englifh  hiftory  which  fhould  unfold  the  fe- 
ries  of  events  which  connects  ancient  and  modern  times. 
The  man  who  mould  light  a  lamp,  to  illuminate  the 
dark  period  of  time  from  the  fth  to  the  i5th  century, 
would  deferve  immortal  honors.  The  attempt  is  great  j 
it  is  noble  ;  it  is  meritorious.  Gibbon  appears  to  have 
been  faithful,  laborious,  and  perhaps  impartial.  It  is 
his  ftile  and  manner  only  I  am  cenfuring  ;  for  thefe 
are  exceedingly  faulty.  For  proof  of  this  I  appeal  to 
a  fingle  fact,  which  I  have  never  heard  contradicted  ; 
that  a  man  who  would  comprehend  Gibbon,  muft  read 
with  painful  attention,  and  after  all  receive  little  im 
provement. 

THE  encomiums  of  his  countrymen  proceed  from 
falfe  tafte  i  a  tafte  for  fuperfluous  ornament.  Men 
are  difpofed  to  lefTen  the  trouble  of  reading,  and  to  fpare 
the  labor  of  examining  into  the  caufes  and  confequences 
of  events.  They  choofe  to  pleafe  their  eyes  and  ears, 
rather  than  feed  the  mind.  Hence  the  rage  for  a- 
IridgementS)  and  a  difplay  of  rhetorical  embellishments* 
Hence  the  eclat  with  which  "Millet's  Elements  of 
General  Hiftory,"  is  received  in  the  world.  This 
work  is  no  more  than  an  Index  to  General  Hiftory  ;  or 
a  recapitulation  of  the  principal  events.  It  is  calculat 
ed  for  two  clafles  of  people  ;  for  thofe  who,  having 
read  hiftory  in  the  original  writers,  want  to  revife  their 
ftudies,  without  a  repetition  of  their  firft  labors  ;  and 
for  thofe  who  have  but  little  time  to  employ  in  read 
ing,  and  expeft  only  a  general  and  fuperficidl  knowlege 
of  hiftory.*  But  a  man  who  would  know  the  mi 
nute  fprings  of  action  ;  the  remote  and  collateral,  as 
well  as  the  direct  caufes  and  confequences  of  events ; 
and  the  nice  (hades  of  character  which  diftinguim  emi 
nent  men,  with  a  view  to  draw  rules  from  living  ex 
amples  ;  fuch  a  man  muft  pafs  by  abridgements  as 
tram  ;  he  muft  have  recourfe  to  the  original  writers,  or 
to  collections  of  authentic  papers.  Indeed  a  collection 

cf 

*R2AD»»sof  the'laft  okfcriptioa  are  the  moft-aamerous* 


AND  CRITICAL;        373 

all  the  material  official  papers,  arranged  in  the  order  of 
time,  however  dry  and  unentertaining  to  moft  readers, 
is  really  the  befl,  and  the  only  authentic  hiftory  of  a  coun 
try.  The  philofopher  and  ftatefman,  who  wifh  to  fub- 
ftitute  fact  for  opinion,  will  generally  fufpecl:  human 
teftimony ;  but  repofe  full  confidence  in  the  evidence 
of  papers,  which  have  been  the  original  inftruments  of 
public  tranfa&ions,  and  recorded  by  public  authority. 

THESE  ftri£hires  are  contrary  to  the  opinions  of 
xnoft  men,  efpecially  as  they  regard  the  ftile  of  the  au 
thors  mentioned,,  Yet  they  are  written  with  a  full 
conviction  of  their  being  well  founded.  They  pro 
ceed  from  an  earneft  defire  of  arrefting  the  progrefs  of 
falfe  tafte  in  writing,  and  of  feeing  my  countrymen 
called  back  to  nature  and  truth. 

POSTSCRIPT. 

THE  foregoing  remarks  were  written  before  I  had 
feen  the  opinions  of  that  judicious  and  elegant  writer, 
Eaft  Apthorp,  M.  A.  vicar  of  Croydon,  on  the  fame 
hiftory.  The  following  paffage  is  too  direclly  in  point 
to  be  omitted.  It  is  in  his  "  Second  Letter  on  th«^ 
Study  of  Hiftory," 

UI  WAS  difappointed  in  my  expectations  of  inftruc- 
tion  from  this  book  (Gibbon's  Hiftory)  when  I  dif- 
cerned  that  the  anthor  had  adopted  that  entertaining 
but  fuperficial  manner  of  writing  hiftory,  which  was 
firft  introduced  by  the  Abbe  de  Vertot,  whofe  Hiftory 
of  the  Revolutions  in  the  Government  of  the  Roman 
Republic,  is  one  of  thofe  agreeable  and  feducing  mod^ 
els  which  never  fail  of  producing  a  multitude  of  imita 
tions.  There  is,  in  this  way  of  writing,  merit  enough 
to  recommend  it  to  fuch  readers,  and  fuch  writers,  as 
propofe  to  themielves  no  higher  aim,  than  an  elegant 
literary  amufement  :  It  piques  their  curionty,  while  it 
gratifies  their  indolence.  The  hiftorian  has  the  advan* 
itt  this  way,  of  palling  ovej  fuch  events  and 
£  3 


374        ND  T  E  S,  'HI  S  T  O  R  I C  A  L 

tutions  as,  however  effential  to  the  fcience  of  hiftory, 
are  lefs  adapted -to  fhine  in  the  recital.  By  fupprefiing 
fads  and  violating  chronology  ;  by  fele&ing  the  mod 
pleafing  incidents  and  placing  them  in  a  finking  point 
of  view,  by  the  coloring  and  drapery  of  ftile  and  com- 
poiition,  the  imagination  is  gratified  with  a  gaudy 
fpecracle  of  triumphs  and  revolutions  paffing  in  review 
before  it  ;  while  the  rapid  fuccefTion  of  great  events 
affords  a  tranfient  delight,  without  leaving  ufeful  and 
lafting  imp!  effions  either  on  the  memory  or  judge 
ment  ;  or  fixing  thofe  principles  which  ought  to  be 
the  refult  of  hiltonc  information. 

"  NOR  is  it  the  worft  confequence  of  this  flight  and. 
modifh  way  of  compiling  hiftory,  that  it  affords  to  fu- 
pine  and  unrefle&ing  readers  a  barren  entertainment, 
to  fill  up  the  vacant  hours  of  indolence  and  diflipation. 
The  hiftorian  who  gives  himfelf  the  privilege  of  muti 
lating  and  feledting,  and  arranging  at  difcretion  the  rec 
ords  of  paft  ages,  has  full  fcope  to  obtrude  on  his  care- 
Jefs  readers  any  fyftem  that  fuits  with  his  preconceived 
opinions  or  particular  views  in  writing." — "  The  oaly 
legitimate  ftudy  of  hiftory  is  in  original  hijfarians," 

THE  fame  writer  complains  of  a  decline  of  literature 
in  Great  Britain,  fixing  the  "  fettlement  that  followed 
the  revolution,"  as  the  era  of  true  fcience  and  great- 
nefs.  He  remarks  that  the  "aim  of  modern  writers 
ieems  to  be  to  furnifh  their  readers  with  fugitive  amufe- 
ment,  and  that  ancient  literature  is  become  rather  the 
ornament  of  our  libraries,  than  the  accomplimment  of 
our  minds  ;  being  fupplanted  by  the  modifh  produc 
tions  which  are  daily  read  and  forgotten/' 

[F,  page  76.] 

FOR  proof  of  what  I  have  advanced  refpe£ting  the 
found  of  c  in  Rome,  1  would  obferve,  that  the  genitive 
cafe  of  the  ririt  declenfion  in  Latin  anciently  ended  in 
«f/j  which  was  probably  copied  from  the  Greeks  ',  fof 

it 


A  K  D    C  R     T  I  C  A  L.  37$ 

it  is  very  evident  the  Latin  <z  in  later  writers,  was  the 
true  reprefentative  of  the  Greek  ai.  Thus  Moufai  in 
Greek,  was  tranflated  into  the  Roman  tongue,  nwfa. 
Now  c  before  ai  had  the  found  of  k  ;  for  where  the 
Romans  wrote  ca  the  Greeks  wrote  kal.  Thus  mufi- 
ca,  muficae  in  the  firft  declenfion  muft  have  been  pro 
nounced  rnufika^  mufikaiy  not  mufifee^  as  we  now  pro 
nounce  the  a. 

Asa  further  proof,  we  may  appeal  to  the  laws  of  the 
Roman  poetry,  by  which  dipthongs  were  always  long, 
having  the  found  of  two  vowels  combined. 

BUT  a  decifive  proof  that  c  before  the  vowels  <?,  <?,  u 
and  the  dipthongs,  had  the  power  of  k,  is  that  the 
Greeks  always  tranflated  the  c  in  kappa.  They  wrote 
Caefar,  Kaifaros^  &e. 

IN  confirmation  of  which  I  may  add,  that  the  Ger 
mans,  among  whom  the  word  Cesjar  became  common 
to  all  emperors,  and  now  fignifies  emperor,  fpell  it  Kai- 
far  ;  and  in  thej  pronunciation  they  preferve  the  true 
Roman  found  of  Cafar.* 

THAT  the  Roman  c  before  e  and  /'  had  the  force  of 
th  or  tjhj  is  probable  from  the  prefent  practice  of  the 
Italians,  who  w  /u'd  be  the  moft  likely  to  retain  the 
pure  Roman  pronunciation.  In  modern  Italian  ce,  ci 
are  pronounced  cbe^  chi  ;  xgdolcemente^  Cicero^  pronoun 
ced  dolchemente^  Chic  hero. 

IN  this  opinion  I  am  fupportrd  by  Dr.  Middleton, 
who  feems  to  have  been  thoroughly  verfed  in  Roman 
literature.  It  may  gratify  the  learned  reader  to  fee  his 
own  words.  De  Lat.  Liter,  pron.  dij/er. 

"ANTE  vocales  a,  o,  v\  eundem  olim  fonum  habuifle 
ac  hodie  habet  certhTimum  eft  :  qualem  autem  ante 

reliquas 


the  Ruffian  appellation  of  Emperor,  is  a  contractio 
It  is  pronounced  in  the  Ruflian,  char  or  tjhar. 

•f  IN  ancient  iafcriptions,  and  the  early  Roraaa  authors,  v  was.  writ 

tea 


376        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

reliquas  e  et  /,  diphthongofque  a,  a?,  ev  habuerit,  haud 
ita  convenit.  Angli  iliam  Gallique  etiam,  baud  ab  s 
diftinguunt,  in  Ccena,  Caefar,  Ceres,  cinis,  &c.  at  in 
iifdem  Itali,  quod  Romanes  etiam  fecifle  olim  exiftimo, 
eum  huic  literae  fonum  tribuunl,  quo  no§  ch  efferimus, 
in  vocibus  noftris,  cbeek^  cherry,  cheap,  &c.  itaque  pro- 
nunciant  Cicero,  uti  nos  Chichefter,  chicheley,  &c.  ita 
tamen  ac  fi  ante  f,  cum  in  medio  vocis  fequatur  voca- 
lem,  Htera  t  leviter  ajjmodum  et  fubobfcurs  fonandai 
interponeretur  ;  ut  Citcero,  Chitchefter,  quam  prcnun- 
tiandi  rationem  exprefiifie  plane  fculptor  quidam  vide- 
tur,  .qui  in  infcriptione  veteri  contra  orthographiae  reg- 
ulas,  /  ante  c  interpofuit  in  nomine  Frbitcius" 


HE  obferves  however  that  Lipiius  ridicules  this  o- 
pinion,  and  contends  that  c  had  in  all  cafes  the  force  of 
/.  This  the  Doctor  afcribes  to  his  partiality  for  the 
pronunciation  of  his  countrymen,  the  Germans,  which, 
he  fays,  has  often  led  him  into  errors.  For  altho  k 
before  #,  0,  u  ufed  frequently  to  be  written  for  ^,  a^. 
Karcer  for  Career^  yet  it  never  took  the  place  of  c  before 

e  and  1  5  we  never  nnd  Karker  for  Career* 

/ 

BUT  that  e  had  the  found  of  our  cb^  is  probable  from 
another  facf  :  In  old  infcriptibns  it  is  foi\nd  that  c  wasj 
often  ufed  for  /  before  /  ;  csndicio  for  conditio^palacium  for 

palatium, 

ten  w,  and  pronounced  oo  or  w.  The  following  extracts  from  the  laws 
of  Romulus,  &c.  wi)]  give  the  reader  an  idea  of  the  e<rly  orthography 
of  the  Latin  tongue  i— 

i  DF.OS  patrios  colunto  :  externas  fuperftitiones  aut  fabulas  ne  admis 
cento. 

3  No  c  TURN  A  facrificia  peruigiliaque  amouentor. 

8  VXOR  farreatione  viro  iundla,  in  facra  et  bona  eius  venito—  ius  deui. 
Oitendi  ne  efto. 

13  Si  pater  filiora  ter  venumduit,  filius  a  patre  liber  efto. 

%  A  /aw  of  Numa. 

£  Qui  terminym  cxarafit,  jpfus  et  boues  facrei  funto. 

A  law  of  ruMut  BtfUruu. 
*  NATI  trigemin:>  doniccm  pabsres  efunt»  dc  puMico 


A  N  B    C  R  I  T  1  C  A  L. 

$a!atitim.  Now  cb  in  Englifh  have  a  compound  found,, 
which  begins  with  that  of  f,and  hence  ti  and  ci  in  Englifh 
have  taken  the  found  of  ch  or  Jh.  It  is  evident  there 
fore  that  c  before  *  had  a  great  affinity  to  ti ;  an  affinity 
which  is  ftill  preferved  in  the  Italian  language.  Thefe 
circumftances  give  us  reafon  to  believe  that  ci  and  //'  ir> 
tondicio  and  palatium^  were  both  pronounced  cht^  condi^ 
chiO)  palachium*  This  found  of  ci  agrees  perfectly  well 
with  the  Saxon  found  in  «'/</,  pronounced  child ;  cek, 
now  pronounced  cfiil^  as  I  have  remarked  abpve  >  text, 
page  72. 

[G,  page  82.] 

I  SHALL  not  enter  into  a  particular  difcuffion  of 
the  queftion,  whether  h  is  a  mark  of  found  or  not.  By 
Jts  convertibility  with  k  and  c  in  the  ancient  languages, 
we  have  reafon  to  conclude  that  it  once  had  a  guttural 
found,  and  the  pronunciation  of  fome  northern  nations 
of  Europe  confirms  'the  opinion.  But  it  appears  in 
modern  Englifh  to  have  no  found  by  itfelf ;  it  however 
affects,  in  fome  degree,  the  found  of  the  vowel  to  which 
Jt  is  prefixed,  by  preyioufly  opening  the  mouth  wider 
than  is  neceiTary  to  articulate  the  vowel.  Thus  in 
band  we  hear  no  found  but  qf  and ;  yet  in  pronouncing 
hand  we  open  the  throat  wider,  and  emit  the  breath 
with  violence  befpre  we  begin  the  found,  which  makes 
an  obvious  difference  in  pronouncing  the  words  and 
and  hand ;  and  perhaps  this  diftinc>ion  is  perceiveable 
as  far  as  the  words  can  be  hearcj.  The  fame  may  be 
faid  of  tb  in  think. 

THE  inftance  of  a  man  who  loft  a  dinner  by  telling 
his  fervant  to  eat  it,  when  he  meant  to  tell  him  to  heat 
it,  affords  a  ufeful  leffon  to  thofe  who  are  difpofed  19 
treat  the  letter  h  with  too  much  negleft, 

[H,  page  85.] 

THAT  /  ftiort  is  the  fame  found  as  te  we  have  the 
authority  of  one  of  the  firft  and  belt  Englilh  grammari- 


378       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

ans.  "  Hunc  fonum,  (ee)  quoties  correptus  eft,  AngH 
per  /breve,  exprimunt ;  quum  vero  producitur,  fcribunt 
ut  plurimum  per  eey  non  raro  tamen  per  ie  ;  vel  etiam 

per  ea  ;  ut, //,//,/**/, ///,/*W,  near,"  &c. Wallis, 

Gram.  Sea.  2. 

ASH  confirms  the  opinion.  "  Ee  has  one  found,  as 
-in  fee,  thee^  and  coincides  with  the  narrow  i." — Gram. 
DifT.  pref.  to  his  Die. 

KENRICK'S  arrangement  of  the  long  and  fart  vow 
els  is  exa6tly  fimilar  to  mine. 

SHERIDAN  entertains  a  different  opinion  refpe&ing 
the  fhort  i  and  e.  He  confiders  them  as  diftincl:  vow 
els,  incapable  of  prolongation.  Rhet.  Gram.  pref.  to 
his  Dic~L  page  16.  In  this  he  differs  from  molt  other 
•writers  upon  the  fubjecl-,  who  have  attended  to  the 
philofophical  diftin6tions  of  founds.  This  appears  to 
be  an  inaccuracy  in  his  diftribution  of  the  vowels  3  al- 
tho  it  cannot  affect  the  practice  of  fpeaking. 

THE  found  of  the  Roman  /,  it  is  agreed  on  all  hands, 
was  that  of  the  Engliih  ee.  It  retains  that  found  Itiil 
in  the  Italian,  French  and  Spanifti,  which  are  immedi 
ately  derived  from  the  Latin.  It  had  its  long  and  fhort 
founds  in  Latin  ;  as  in  vidit  homini ;  the  firft  pronoun 
ced  veedee,  and  the  laft  homing  as  we  now  pronounce 
i  infill.  The  French  preferve  the  long  found,  and  lay 
it  down  as  a  general  rule,  that  /  is  pronounced  like  the 
Englifh  ee  :  Yet  in  difcourfe  they  actually  morten  the 
found,  and  mfentimens^  rcffentiment^  &c,  pronounce  2  as 
we  do  in  civil.  In  the  French  motif ^  i  is  long  like  ee  ; 
in  this  and  all  fimilar  terminations,  we  ihorten  the 
found,  moth.  Mr.  Sheridan,  in  this  particular,  is  evi 
dently  fingular  and  probably  wrong. 

THAT  e  in  let  is  but  the  fiiort  abrupt  found  of  a  in 
late,  is  not  fo  clear  ;  but  to  me  is  evident.  There  is 
little  or  no  difference  in  the  pofition  of  the  organs  with 

which 


.     A  N  D    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L.  379 

we  pronounce  both  vowels.  The  Roman,  Ital 
ian,  Spanifh  and  French  e  is  confidered  as  the  repre- 
fentative  of  the  Englifh  a  in  late,  made  ;  and  yet  in 
common  difcourfe,  it  is  (hortened  into  the  found  of* 
in  let)  men  :  Witnefs,  legere,  avec,  emmene,  bueno,  enten 
dido  :  We  obferve  the  fame  in  Englifh  5  for/aid,  any, 
many,  which  are  pronounced  fed,  enny,  menny,  exhibit 
the  fame  vowel  or  fhort  a  ;  the  e  being  the  abrupt 
found  of  at  infaid.  1  mud  therefore  differ  from  Mr. 
Sheridan,  and  ftill  believe  that  e  in  let,  and  z  in  fit,  are 
capable  of  prolongation.  Children,  when,  inftead  of 
a  comparifon,  they  would  exprefs  the  fuperlative  by  an 
emphafis,  fay  leetle  inftead  of  little  ;  which  is  a  mere 
prolongation  of  i  fhort. 

MR.  Sheridan,  in  my  opinion,  is  guilty  of  an  error 
of  greater  confequence,  in  marking  the  two  qualities  of 
found  in  bard  and  bad  with  the  fame  figure.  He  dif- 
tinguiihes  the  different  qualities  of  found  in  pool  and 
full,  and  in  not  and  naught  ;  and  why  he  Ihould  omit 
the  diftincliion  of  found  in  bard  and  bad,  ajk  and  man, 
is  to  me  inconceiveable.  The  laft  diftin&ion  is  as  ob 
vious  as  the  others  which  he  has  marked  j  and  the  de- 
feel:  of  his  fcheme  muft  lead  a  foreigner  into  miftakes. 
His  fcheme  is  fmgular  ;  Kenrick,  Ferry  and  Burn  all 
make  a  diftinclion  in  the  time  of  pronouncing  a  in  ajk 
aiid  at  ;  and  even  Scott,  who  copies  Sheridan's  pro 
nunciation  ahnoft  implicitly,  ftill  makes  the  fame  dif- 
tinciion. 

[I,  page  87.] 

w  NON  multum  differt  hie  fonus  (w)  ab  Anglorum 
00,  Gallorum  on,  Germanorum  u  pingui,  rapidiflime 
pronunciatis  ;  adeoque  a  quibufdam  pro  vocali  fuit  ha- 
bita,  cum  tamen  revera  conjonajit,  quanquam  ip(i  vooali 
admodum  fit  affinis." Waliis. 

ulr  is. indeed  on  the  celerity  of  utterance,  that  all 
fhe  difference,  in  many  cafes,  between  confonants  and 

vowels 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

vowels  depends  ;  as  in  w  and  yy  in  Englifh ;  which, 
being  difcharged  quickly,  perform  the  office  of  confo- 
nants,  in  giving  form  only  to  the  fucceeding  vowel  j 
but  when  protracted  or  drawled  out,  acquire  a  tone  and 

become  the  vocal  oo  and    ee." ^Kenrick,    Rhet. 

Gram.  p.  4. 

PERRY  has  adopted  this  opinion  and  contends  warm 
ly  that  w  is  a  confonant.  If  w  is  a  vowel,  fays  he,  then 
wool)  wo/fa  will  be  pronounced  oo-ool^  oo-olf^  or  00/,  olf.  I 
am  fenfible  that  in  the  beginning  of  words,  w  has  not 
precifely  the  power  of  oo  ;  but  it  is  not  clear  from  this 
facl:  that  it  has  the  properties  of  a  confonant.  Place  a 
vowel  before  wy  as,  ow,  and  there  is  no  compreffion  of 
the  lips  or  other  parts  of  the  mouth,  to  obftruft  the.- 
found,  as  there  is  produced  by  b  or  m,  in  eb  and  em. 

IN  oppofition  to  the  authorities  mentioned,  Sheridao, 
ranks  w  among  the  vowels,  and  fuppofes  it  to  form 
dipthongs  with  the  other  vowels,  as  in  well,  «//'//,  &c. 
It  appears  to  me  to  be  a  letter  rather  of  an  ambiguous 
nature,  pf  which  we  have  others  in.  the  language. 

JJ,  page  88.] 

IT  has  been  remarked  that  by  old  authors  y  was  oft 
en  ufed  for  g  ;  yeve  for  give  ;  foryete  for  forget.— — «% 
Chaucer,  Knight's  Tale,  1884. 

I  »HAVE  obferved  that  fome  foreigners  pronounce 
ycary  in  the  fame  manner  nearly  as  they  do  ear  ;  and 
yeaft  is  commonly  pronounced  eaft.  This  pronuncia 
tion  would  eafily  lead  a  man  into  the  fuppofition  that 
y  is  merely  ee  fliort.  But  the  pronunciation  is  vicious. 

I  OBSERVE  alfo  that  Mr-.  Sheridan  fays,  "ye  has  the 
found  of  e  long  in  ye  ;  of  a  long  in  yea  \  of  e  long  in 
year^  yean  ;  and  of  e  fhort  in  yearn^  yell,  &c.  This  con* 
firms  my  opinionj  and  is,  a  proof  that  he  does  not  pro 
nounce  y  at  all. 


A  N  *    CRITICAL  $S* 

IF  y  has  the  found  of  e  in  year,  then  e  has  »0  founcf$ 
or  there  are  in  the  word,  two  founds  of  *,  which  no 
£erfon  will  undertake  to  afTert.  The  difpute  however 
is  eafily  fettled.  I  have  learnt  by  attending  to  the  con* 
verfation  of  well  bred  Englifhmen,  that  they  do  not 
pronounce  y  at  all  in  year  and  many  other  words.  They 
fay  ear,  e>  for  year^  ye  ;  and  the  found  of  *?,  they  erro- 
neoufly  fuppofe  to  be  that  of  y.  In  America,  y  has  in 
thefe  words,  the  confonant  found  it  has  in  young  ;  and 
the  Englilh  pronunciation  muft  in  this  inftance  be 
faulty. 

[K,  page  103.] 

"  NOW  the  harmony  of  profe  arifes  from  the  fame 
principle  with  that  which  conftitutes  the  harmony  of* 
verfe  ;  viz.  numbers  ;  or  fuch  a  difpofition  of  the  words 
as  throws  them  into  juft  metrical  feet,  but  very  differ* 
ent  from  thofe  which  conftitute  any  fpecies  of  verfe." 
— Eflay  on  the  Power  of  Numbers,  &e.  page  4.  Introd, 

"A  GOOD  ftile  is  both  exprejflve  and  harmonious* 
The  former  depends  on  the  happy  choice  of  the  words 
to  convey  our  ideas  ;  the  other  on  the  happy  choice  of 
numbers  in  the  difpofition  of  the  words.  The  lan 
guage  of  fome  is  expreflive,  but  unharmonious  ;  that 
is,  the  writer's  words  ftrongly  convey  his  fentimentSj 
but  the  erder  in  which  they  are  placed  creates  a  found 
unpleafant  to  the  ear.  The  ftile  of  others  is  harmoni 
ous  but  not  expreflive  ;  where  the  periods  are  well 
turned  and  the  numbers  well  adapted,  but  the  fenfe 
obfcure.  The  former  fatisfies  the  mind,  but  offends  the? 
ear  ;  the  latter  gratifies  the  ear,  but  difgufts  the  mind, 
A  good  ftile  entertains  and  pkafcs  both,"  tyc  — -Ibm, 
2d.  Part,  page  17. 

THE  author  proceeds  to  illuftrate  his  do&rines  by 
fhowing  in  what  the  harmony  of  profe  confifts.  He 
remarks  that  the  words  fhould  in  fome  degree  be  ars 
echo  to  the  fenfe,  in  profe  as  well  as  verfe, 

H« 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

HE  proceeds—"  Every  fentence  may  be  conceived  as 
divifible  into  diftin6t  and  feparate  claufes  ;  every  claufe^ 
where  there  is  an  apparent  cefTation  of  the  voice,  mould 
always  end  with  a  generous  foot  ;  and  all  the  preced 
ing  numbers  be  fo  intermixt,  that  the  fhort  ones  be  du 
ly  qualified  by  the  fucceeding  long  ones  ;  referving  the 
beft  and  molt  harmonious  number  for  the  cadence." 

To  fhow  how  much  depends  on  the  proper  arrange 
ment  of  words,  he  quotes  the  following  inftance — "  A 
divine,  fpeaking  of  the  Trinity,  hath  this  expreflion— • 
It  is  a  myftery  which  we  firmly  believe  the  truth  of, 
and  humbly  adore  the  depth  of."  Here  the  language 
is  expreflive,  but  not  harmonious  ;  not  merely  becaufe 
the  claufes  end  with  the  particle  of\  but  becaufe  they  a- 
bound  with  feeble  numbers,  Pyrrhics  and  Trochees* 
Let  us  change  the  difpofition  of  the  feet — "  It  is  a  myf 
tery,  the  truth  of  which  we  firmly  believe,  and  the 
depths  of  which  we  humbly  adore."  The  difference  in 
the  melody  is  very  perceiveable.  The  force  and  mufic 
of  the  laft  difpofition  is  increafed  by  the  Iambics  and 
Anapaeits. 

THE  moft  forceable  feet,  and  thofe  beft  adapted  t& 
fublime  and  ferious  fubjecls,  are  thofe  which  contain 
the  moft  long  fyllables,  or  end  in  a  long  fyllable  ;  as 
the  Iambic,  the  Spondee,  the  Anapseft.  The  weak 
feet  are  thofe  which  have  the  moft  fhort  fyllables  or  end 
in  a  fhort  fyllable ;  as  the  Pyrrhic,  the  Trochee,  the 
Tribrach. 

THE  want  of  proper  meafures,  or  a  mixture  of  weak 
and  ftrong  fyllables,  is  very  remarkable  in  a  paflage  of 
the  Declaration  of  Independence.  "  We  muft  there 
fore  acquiefce  in  the  neceflity,  which  denounces  our 
reparation,  and  hold  them,  as  we  hold  the  reft  of  man 
kind,  enemies  in  war,  in  peace^  friends."  The  three  laft 
fyllables  form,  if  any  thing,  a  Bacchic  ;  the  firft  fylla 
ble,  fhort,  and  the  two  others,  long.  But  in  a  juft  pro 
nunciation,  the  foot  is  neceflarily  broken  by  a  paufe  af 
ter 


AND    CRITICAL.  383 

ter  peace.  This  interruption,  and  the  two  long  fylla- 
bles,  render  the  clofe  of  the  fentence  extremely  heavy. 
The  period  is  concife  and  expreflive,  as  it  (lands  ;  but 
the  arrangement  might  be  much  more  harmonious — 
"  Our  enemies  in  war  ;  In  peace,  our  friends."  Here 
the  meafure  and  melody  are  perfect  ;  the  period  clofing 
with  three  Iambics,  preceded  by  a  Pyrrhic. 

[L,  page  1 1 r.j 

IN  a.  Scotch  Ballad,  called  gdom  o  Gordon^  we  find 
the  word  dreips  for  drops. 

"—AND  clear,  clear  was  hir  zellow  hair 
Whereon  the  reid  bluid  dreips" 

But  it  was  often  fpelt  drap^  agreeable  to  the  pronuncia 
tion.  See  Edward.  Rel.  An.  Poet.  53. 

THE  dialed!  in  America  is  peculiat  to  the  defcend- 
ants  of  the  Scotch  Irifh. 

[M,  page  in.] 

MOUGHT  is  the  paft  time  or  participle  of  an  old 
Saxon  verb  mowe  or  mowen^  to  be  able.  It  anfwered  to 
thepoffe  of  the  Romans,  and  thepouvotr  of  the  French. 
This  verb  occurs  frequently  in  Chaucer. 

*'  BUT  that  fcience  is  fo  fer  us  beforne, 
We  motuen-not,  altho  we  had  it  fworne, 
It  overtake,  it  (lit  away  fo  faft, 
It  wo!  us  maken  beggers  at  the  laft." 
Cant.  Tales,  1.  16,  148,  Bell's  edit. 

"To  mowen  fuch  a  knight  done  live  or  die." 

Troil  and  Cref,  2.  1594.  That  is,  to  be  able  to  make 
fuch  a  knight  live  01  die. 

"  AN  D  nought  I  hope  to  winne  thy  love, 
Ne  more  his  tonge  could  faye." 

Sir  Cauline,  an  old  Ballad,  1.  163. 


NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

"  THX  thought  they  herd  a  woman  wepe, 
But  her  they  mougbt  not  fe." 

Adam  Bell,  &c.  part  3. 1.  2.  in  Rel.  of  An. 

"  So  mougbt  thou  now  in  thefe  refined  lays 

Delight  the  dainty  ears  of  higher  powers. 
And  fo  mougbt  they  in  their  deep  Fcanning  fklll^ 
Allow  and  grace  our  Coin's  flowing  quill." 
Spenfer,  Hobbynall. 

THERE  feerri  to  have  been  among  our  Saxon  ancef- 
tors  two  verbs  of  nearly  or  exactly  the  fame  fignifica- 
tion,  may  and  might  -,  and  mowe-  and  mwght.  There 
is  fome  reafon  to  think  they  were  not  fynonimous  ; 
that  may  was  ufed  to  exprefs  pojjibility^  as  /  may  go  next 
week  ;  and  mowe  to  exprefs  pouter^  as  they  mow&n  goy  they 
are  able  to  go.  But  it  is  not  certain  that  fuch  a  dif- 
tinclion  ever  exifted.  The  Germans  ufe  moegen>  in/ 
the  infinitive ;  mag,  in  the  indie,  pref.  meege^  in  the 
fubj.  pref.  in  the  imperfect  of  the  ind.  mockte  ;  and  in 
the  imp.  of  the  fubj.  machte.  The  Englifh  ufe  may 
ami  might  folely  in  their  writings  ;  but  mought  is  ftill 
pronounced  in  fome  parts  of  America. 

HOLPE  or  holp  was  not  obfolete  when  the  Bible 
was  laft  tranflated,  in  the  reign  of  king  James  ;  for  it 
occurs  in  feveral  places  in  that v translation.  It  occurs 
frequently  in  old  authors. 

*f  UN«INOLY  they  flew  him,  that  holp  them  oft  ait  nede.'* 
Skelton  El.  on  Earl  of  Northum.  1.  47. 

IN  Virginia  it  is  pronounced  hope*  "  Shall  I  hope 
you,  Sir." 

BUT  we  muft  look  among  the  New  England  com 
mon  people  for  ancient  Englifh  phrafes  ;  for  they  have 
been  160  years  fequeftefed  in  fome  meafure  from  the 
world,  and  their  language  has  not  fuflfered  material 
changes  from  their  firft  fettlement  to  the  prefent  time. 
Hence  moft  of  the  phrafes,  ufed  by  Shakefpear,  Con- 
greve,  and  other  writers  who  have  defcribed  Englifh 
manners  and  recorded  the  language  of  all  clafTes  of  peo 
ple, 


AND    CRITICAL.  385 

pie,  are  ftill  heard  iri  the  common  difcourfe  of  the  New 
England  yeomanry. 

^   .  , 

THE  verb  be,  in  the  indicative,  prefent  tenfe,  which 
Lowth  obferves  is  almoft  obfolete  in  England,  is  Hill 
ufed  after  the  ancient  manner,  I  be,  we  be,  you  be,  they  be. 
The  old  plural  koufen  is  ftill  ufed  for  houfes.  The  old 
verb  wol  for  will,  and  pronounced  wool^  is  not  yet  fallen 
into  difufe.  This  was  the  verb  principally  ufed  in 
Chaucer's  time,  and  it  now  lives  in  the  pureft  branch 

of  the  Teutonic^  the  German. 

- 

FOR  many  years,  I  had  fuppofed  the  word  dern  in 
the  fenfe  of  great  or  fever  e^  was  local  in  New  England. 
Perhaps  it  may  not  now  be  ufed  any  where  elfe  ;  but  it 
was  once  a  common  English  word.  Chaucer  ufes  it  in 
the  fenfe  offecret,  earneft^  &c» 

"THIS  clerk  was  cleped  Hende  Nicholas 
Of  dsrtiE  love  he  could  and  of  folas." 

Mil.  Tale,  1.  3200. 

**  YE  moftcn  be  ful  derne  as  in  this  cafe." 
Ibm.  3297. 

THE  word  is  in  common  ufe  in  New  England  and 
pronounced  darn.  It  has  not  however  the  fenfe  it  had 
formerly  ;  it  is  now  ufed  as  an  adverb  to  qualify  an  ad 
jective,  as  darnjweet  ;  denoting  a  great  degree  of  the 
quality. 

THE  New  England  people  preferve  the  ancient  ufc 
of  there  and  here  after  a  word  or  fentence,  defignating 
the  place  where  ;  as  this  here^  that  there.  It  is  called  vul 
gar  in  Englifh  ;  and  indeed  the  addition  of  here  or  there 
is  generally  tautological.  It  is  however  an  ancient  prac 
tice  ;  and  the  French  retain  it  in  the  pure  elegant  lan 
guage  of  their  country  ;  ce pays  la,  celu'i  la,  cet  nimme 
ui  ;  where  we  obferve  this  difference  only  between  the 
French  and  Englilh  idioms,  that  in  French,  the  adverb 
follows  the  noun,  thai  country  ihere^  this  man  here  ; 
A  a  whereas 


386       NOTES,    HISTORICAL 

whereas  in  Englifl^  the  adverb  precedes  the  noun,  that 
there  country  ',  this  here  ?nan.  This  form  of  fpeech  feems 
to  have  been  coeval  with  the  primitive  Saxon,  otherwife 
it  would  not  have  prevailed  fo  generally  among  the  com 
mon  people. 

*  IT.  has  been  before  remarked  that  the  word  ax  for 
afk  was  ufed  in  England,  and  even  in  the  royal  aflent 
to  a£ls  of  parliament,  down  to  the  reign  of  Henry  VI. 

"  AN  D  to  her  huflband  bad  hire  for  to  fey 

If  that  he  axed  after  Nicholas."—  -       % 

Chau.  Mil.  Tale,  3412. 

"  THIS  axetb  hafte  and  of  an  haftif  thing 
Men  may  not  preche  and  maken  taryingi" 
Ibm.  3545. 

THIS  word  to  ax  is  ftill  frequent  in  New  England. 

I  DO  not  know  whether  our  American  fportfmen  ufe 
the  word,  ferret^  in  the  fenfe  of  driving  animals  from 
their  lurking  places.  But  the  word  is  ufed  in  fome 
parts  of  New  England,  and  applied  figuratively  to  many 
tranfactions  in  life.  So  in  Congreve  : 

"  WHERE  is  this  apocryphal  elder  ?  I'll  ferret  him." 
—  *-Old  Bach,  ad  4,  fc.  21. 

SOMETIMES,  but  rarely,  we  hear  the  old  imperative 
of  the  Saxon  thaftan^  now  pronounced  thof.  But  it  is 
generally  pronounced  as  it  is  written,  tha.  It  is  remark 
ed  by  Home,  that  fhofis  ftill  frequent  among  the  com 
mon  people  of  England. 

GIN  or  gyn  for  given  is  ftill  ufed  in  America  ;  as 
3ifhop  Wilkins  remarks,  it  is  in  the  North  of  Eng 
land. 


in  the  fenfe  of  unkfs,  is  as  frequent  as 
anv  word  in  the  language,  and  even  among  the  learned. 

It 


A  N  D    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L,  387 

It  is  commonly  accounted  inelegant,  and  writers  have 
lately  fubftituted  unlefs  :  But  I  do  not  fee  the  propriety 
of  difearding  without,  for  its  meaning  is  exactly  the  fame 
as  that  oiunlejs.  It  is  demonftrated  that  they  are  both 
the  imperatives  of  old  verbs.  Without^  is  be  out,  be  a- 
way  ;  and  unlefs  is  difmifs,  or  be  apart,  Inftead  of  the 
imperative  Chaucer  generally  ufes  the  participle,  witk- 
outen,  being  out. 

THE  beft  writers  life  without  in  the  fehfe  of  unlefs. 

« — AND  if  he  can't  be  cured  without  I  fuck  the  poi- 
fon  from  his  wounds,  Fm  afraid  he  won't  recover  his 

fenfes,  till  I  lofe  mine." Cong.  Love  for  Love,  act 

4.  fc.  3. 

"'TWERE  better  for  him,  you  had  not  been  his 
confeilbr  in  that  affair,  without  you  could  have  kept  his 

counfel  clofer." -Cong.  Way  of  the  World,  aft  3. 

fc.  7. 

THE  beft  fpeakers  ufe  the  word  in  this  manner,  in 
common  difcourfe,  and  I  muft  think,  with  propriety. 

PEEK  is  alfo  ufed  corruptedly  for  peep.  By  a  fimi- 
lar  change  of  the  laft  confonant,  chirk  is  ufed  for  chirp, 
to  make  a  cheerful  noife.  This  word  is  wholly  loft,  ex 
cept  in  New  England.  It  is  there  ufed  for  comfortably^ 
bravely^  cheerful ;  as  when  one  enquires  about  a  fick 
perfon,  it  is  faid,  he  is  chirk.  Chirp  is  ftill  ufed  to  ex- 
prefs  the  fmging  of -birds,  but  the  chirk  of  New  Eng 
land  is  not  underrlood,  and  therefore  derided.  Four; 
hundred  years  ago  it  was  a  polite  term.  . 

"  AMD  kifleth  hire  fwete,  and  chirkttb  as  a  fparws 
With  his  lippes."— — 

Chaucer,  Somp.  TaJe,  7386. 

IN  the  following  it  is  ufed  for  a  difagreeable  noifs. 

**  At  n  full  of  dirking  was  that  fory  place." 

Knight's  Taie,  2006. 

A  a  z 


88        NOTES,    HISTORICAL 


al  fo  ful  eke  of  cbirkings 
And  of  many  other  wlrkings." 
Houfe  of  Fame,  85?. 

SHET  for  Jhut  is  now  become  vulgar  ;  yet  this  is  the 
true  original  orthography  and  pronunciation.  It  is 
frQin  the  Saxon  fcitten,  and  I  believe  was  always  fpelt 
jhette  or  fat,  till  after  Chaucer's  time,  for  he  was  a  cor- 
re&  writer  in  his  age,  and  always  fpelt  it  in  that  manner. 

"  VOIDETH  your  man  and  let  him  be  thereout, 

Andjbei  the  dore."  -  % 

Chau.  Yem.  Tale,  16,  605. 

<f  AND  his  mzlRerJaette  the  dore  anon." 
Ibm.  16,  610. 

And  in  a  variety  of  other  places.  This  word  is  almoft 
univerfally  pronounced  Jhet  among  all  clafTes  of  people^ 
not  only  in  New  England,  but  in  Great  Britain  and 
the  fouthern  ftates  of  America.  How  the  fpelling 
came  to  be  changed,  is  not  known  ;  but  it  was  certain 
ly  a  corruption.- 

AN  for  if  is  feen  in  moft  old  authors.  It  remains 
among  the  common  people,  both  in  England  and  A- 
merica.  "  An.  pleafe  your  honor  ;"  that  is,  "  if  your 
honor  pleafe."  In  New  England,  the  phrafes  in  which 
it  occurs  mod  frequently  arc,  "  Let  him  go,  an  he  will$" 
"  Go,  an  you  will  j"  and  others  of  a  fimilar  kind. 

BECAUSE  and  btcafe  were  ufed  promifcuoufly  by 
our  anceftors.  Becafe  is  found  in  fome  ancient  writings, 
tho  not  fo  frequently  as  becaufe.  In  New  England,  we 
frequently  heat  becaje  to  this  day.  It  is  pronounced  be- 
cazr.  It  is  a  compound  of  be  and  caufe  or  cafe  ;  both  of 
thefe  words  with  the  verb  be  make  good  Englifh  j  but 
••,.£{<  fe  is  vulgar. 

THE  vulgar  pronunciation  of  fuck  Isjich.  This  is 
but  a  fmall  deviation  from  the  ancient  elegant  pronun 
ciation,  which  vtasjwicb  orfivicbe,  as  the  word  is  fpelt 

in 


A  N  D    C  R  I  T  I  C  A  L.  389 

in  Chaucer.     Such  is  the  force  of  national  practice  : 
And  altho  the  country  people  in  New  England,  fome- 
times  drawl  their  words  in  fpeaking,  and,  like  their 
brethren,  often  make  falfe  concord,  yet  their  idiom  is 
purely  Saxon  or  Englifh  ;  and  in  a  vaft  number  of  in- 
flances,  they  have  adhered  to  the  true  phrafes,  where 
people,  who  defpife  their  plain  manners,  have  run  into 
error.    Thus  they  fay,  "  a  man  is  going  £y,"  and  not  go- 
ingpqfty  which  is  nonfenfe :  They  fay,  "  I  purpofe  to  go," 
and  not  propofe  to  go,  which  is  not  good  Englifh.    They 
fay,  "  a  fhip  lies  in  harbor,"  not  laysy  which  is  a  modern 
corruption.     They  fay,  "  I  have  done,"  and  never  "  I 
am  done,"  which  is  nonfenfe.     They  fay,  "  it  was  on 
Monday  evening,"  not  "  of  a.  Monday  evening,"  which 
is  an  error.     They  never  ufe  the  abfurd  phrafes  " '  expett 
it  was-,"  and   "the  (hip  will  fail  in  a// next  week." 
They  never  fay  <c  he  is  home,"  but  always,  "  at  home." 
They  ufe  the  old  phrafe,  uit  is  half  after  fix  o'clock," 
which  is  more  correct  than  half  pa/1  fix.     They  fay,  if 
a  perfon  is  not  in  health,  he  isjick.     '^e  modern  Eng- 
lifn  laugh  at  them,  becaufethe  Englifh  fay  a  man  is  *//; 
and  confine  fick  to  exprefs  the  idea  of  a  naufea  in  the 
ftomach.     The  EngUfli  are  wrong,  and  the  New  Eng 
land  people  ufe  the  wor4  in  its  true  fenfe,  which  ex 
tends  to  all  bodily  di (orders,  as  it  is  ufed  by  the  pure 
Englifh  writers.     ///  is  a  contraction  of  evil  -,  and  de 
notes  a  moral  diforder.     Its  application  to  bodily  com 
plaints  is  a  modern  practice,  and  its  meaning  figurative. 
So  that  whatever  improprieties  may  have  crept  into 
their  practice  of  fpeaking,  they  actually  preferve  more 
of  the  genuin  idiom  of  the  Englifh  tongue,  than  many 
of  the  modern  fine  fpeakers  who  fet  up  for  fbndards. 

[N,  page  J20.J 

THE  letters  ch  in  Roman  anfwered  nearly  ta  the 

Greek  ki  or  cbi ;  for  c  had  the  found  of  /£,  at  lead  before 

#,  0,  n.     Ch  or  kh  was  therefore  the  proper  combination 

for  the  Greek  letter ;  which  had  the  found  of  k  followed 

A  a  3  by 


390      NOTES,    HISTORICAL,   &c; 

by  an  afpirate*  This  combination  was  copied  into  our 
language  ;  and  perhaps  the  afpirate  was  once  pronoun 
ced,  like  the  Irifh  guttural  in  Cochran.  But  when  the 
afbirate  was  loft,  k  became  the  proper  reprefentative  of 
the  found.  It  is  wiihed,  that  in  all  the  derivatives  from 
the  ancient  languages,  where  this  character  occurs,  k 
might  be  fubftituted  for  ch  ;  that  perfons  unacquainted 
with  etymology,  might  not  miftake  and  give  ch  its  Eng- 
liih  found. 


A    N 


E 


A 


On  the  NECESSITY,  ADVANTAGES  and  PRACTI 
CABILITY  of  REFORMING  the  MODE  of 
SPELLING,  and  of  RENDERING  the  OR 

THOGRAPHY  Of  WORDS  CORRESPONDENT  tO 
tbt  PRONUNCIATION. 


T  has  been  obferved  by  all  writers 
on  the  Englifh  language,  that  the 
orthography  or  fpelling  of  words 
is  very  irregular  ;  the  fame  letters 
often  representing  different  founds, 
and  the  fame  founds  often  exprefT- 
ed  by  different  letters.  For  this 
irregularity,  two  principal  caufes 
may  be  afligned  : 

1.  THE  changes  to  which  the  pronunciation  of  a 
language  is  liable,  from  the  progrefs  of  fcience  and  civ 
ilization. 

2.  THE  mixture  of  different  languages,  occafioned 
by  revolutions  in  England,  or  by  a  predilection  of  the 

for  words  of  foreign  growth  and  ancient  origin* 

To 


392  A    P    P    E    N    D    I    X, 

To  the  firft  caufe,  may  be  afcribed  the  difference  be-r 
tween  the  fpelling  and  pronunciation  of  Saxon  words. 
The  northern  nations  of  Europe  originally  fpoke  much 
in  gutturals.  This  is  evident  from  the  number  of  af- 
pirates  and  guttural  letters,  which  ftill  remain  in  the 
orthography  of  words  derived  from  thofe  nations  ; 
and  f*0m  the  modern  pronunciation  of  the  collateral 
branches  of  the  Teutonic,  the  Dutch,  Scotch  and  Ger 
man.  Thus  k  before  n  was.  once  pronounced  ;  as  in 
knave^  know  ;  the  gh  in  might^  though^  daughter^  and  oth 
er  fimilar  words  ;  the  g  in  feign,  feign,  &c. 

But  as  favages  proceed  in  forming  languages,  they 
iofe  the  guttural  founds,  in  fome  meafure,  a~nd  adopt 
the  ufe  of  labials,  and  the  more  open  vowels.  The 
cafe  of  fpeaking  facilitates  this  progrefs,  and  the  pro 
nunciation  of  words  is  foftened,  in  proportion  to  a  na 
tional  refinement  of  manners.  This  will  account  for 
the  difference  between  the  ancient  and  modern  lan 
guages  of  France,  Spain  and  Italy  ;  and  for  the*4iffer~ 
cnce  between  the  foft  pronunciation  o/  the  prefent  lan 
guages  of  thofe  countries,  and  the  more  harfn  and  gut 
tural  pronunciation  of  the  northern  inhabitants  of  Eu 
rope. 

IN  this  progrefs,  the  Engljfh  have  loft  the  founds  of 
moil  of  the  guttural  letters.  The  k  before  n  in  know, 
the  g  in  reign,  and  in  many  other  words,  are  become 
mute  in  practice  ;  and  the  gh  is  foftened  into  the  found 
ofyi  as  in  laugh,  or  is  filent,  as  in  brought. 

To  this  practice  of  foftening  the  fopnds  of  letters,  or 
wholly  fupprefTing  thofe  which  are  harm  and  difagreeable, 
may  be  added  a  popular  tendency  to  abbreviate  words, 
of  common  ufe.  Thus  Southward  by  a  habit  of  quick 
pronunciation,  is  become  'Suthark  ;  Wofcefter  and  Lei- 
cejier,  are  become  Woofter  and  Lifter  ;  bufaufs^  biznefs  j 
colonel^  curnel ;  cannot^  will  rwt,  cant,  wont.*  In  this 
•  manner 

*  Jf'ONTh  ftri^ly  a  contraction  ofwri/Kor,  as  the  word  was  ancient^ 

' 


APPENDIX.  393 

manner  the  final  e  is  not  heard  in  many  modern  words, 
in  which  it  formerly  made  a  fyllabie.  The  words 
clothes,  .care^  and  moft  others  of  the  fame  kind,  were 
formerly  pronounced  in  two  fyllables.* 

OF  the  other  caufe  of  irregularity  in  the  fpelling  of 
our  language,  I  have  treated  fumciently  in  the  firilDif- 
fertation.  It  is  here  neceflary  only  to  remark,  that 
when  words  have  been  introduced  from  a  foreign  lan 
guage  into  the  Englim,  they  have  generally  retained 
the  orthography  of  the  original,  however  ill  adapted  to 
exprefs  the  Englifh  pronunciation.  Thus  fatigue^  ma- 
rine,  cbalfe^  retain  their  French  drefs,  while,  to  reprefent 
the  true  pronunciation  in  Englifh,  they  mould  be  fpelt 
fatecg,  mareen,  /haze.  Thus  thro  an  ambition  to  ex 
hibit  the  etymology  of  words,  the  Englim,  in  Philip^ 
pbyfic,  cbGratler^cborus^n&  other  Greek  derivatives,  pre^- 
ferve  the  repreientatives  of  the  original  «J>  and  X  ;  yet 
thefe  words  are  pronounced,  and  ought  ever  to  have 
been  fpelt,  Fillipyfyzzic  or/zz/V,  karatter^  far  us. \ 

BUT  fuch  is  the  ftate  of  our  language.  The  pronun 
ciation  of  the  words  which  are  ftri&ly  Englijh^  has  been 
gradually  changing  for  ages,  and  fince  the  revival  of 
fcience  in  Europe,  the  language  has  received  a  vaft  ac* 
ceflton  of  words  from  other  languages,  many  of  which 
retain  an  orthography  very  ill  fuited  to  exhibit  the  true 
pronunciation. 

THE  queftion  now  occurs  ;  ought  the  Americans 
to  retain  thefe  faults  which  produce  innumerable  in- 

conveniencies 

"TA'KEy  ma-ke>o-ite3bo-fsc)Jio-ney'wil-let  &c.  difTylhba  blim  fue- 
jfunt,  quasnunc  habenterpro  monoiyllabis." Wallis. 

f  THJ:  words  number,  chamber,  and  many  others  in  Englifh  are  from 
the  French  nombre,  cbambre,  &c.  Why  was  the  fpeiling  changed  ?  or 
rather  why  is  the  fpelling  of  lujire,  metre,  theatre,  not  changed  ?  The 
cafes  are  precifely  fiiniiar.  The  Eugli/hman  who  firft  wrote  number  for 
votnbre,  had  no  greater  authority  to  make  the  change,  rhan  any  modern 
writer  ha*  to  fpell  luftre,  metre  in  a  iinaiiar  manner,  lufier,  meter.  The 
change  in  the  firit  initance  was  a  valuable  one  ;  it  conformed  the  fpdling 
t.>  the  pronunciation,  and  I  have  taken  the  liberty,  in  ail  my  writings.,  t* 
-  the  principle  in  liiflery  mtUrt  tr.iter,  tke#tert  Jfp#J£he(9  fcc. 


394  APPEND!    X. 

conveniences  in  the  acquilition  and  ufe  of  the  lan 
guage,  or  ought  they  at  once  to  reform  thefe  abufes, 
and  introduce  order  and  regularity  into  the  orthogra 
phy  of  the  AMERICAN  TONGUE  ? 

LET  us  confider  this  fubje&  with  fome  attention. 

SEVER  AL  attempts  were  formerly  made  in  England  to 
jreftify  the  orthography  of  the  language.*  But  I  ap 
prehend  their  fchemes  failed  of  fuccels,  rather  on  ac 
count  of  their  intrinfic  difficulties,  than  on  account  of 
any  necefTary  impracticability  of  a  reform.  It  was 
propofed,  in  moft  of  thefe  fchemes,  not  merely  to  throw 
out  fuperfluous  and  filent  letters,  but  to  introduce  a  num 
ber  of  new  characters.  Any  attempt  on  fuch  a  plan  muft 
undoubtedly  prove  unfuccefsful.  It  is  not  to  be  expect 
ed  that  an  orthography,  perfectly  regular  and  fimple, 
fuch  as  would  be  formed  by  a  u  Synod  of  Grammari 
ans  on  principles  of  fcience,"  will  ever  be  fubftituted 
for  that  confufed  mode  of  fpelling  which  is  now  e(tab- 
Jifhed.  But  it  is  apprehended  that  great  improvements 
may  be  made,  and  an  orthography  almoft  regular,  or 
fuch  as  fhall  obviate  moft  of  the  prefent  difficulties 
which  occur  in  learning  our  language,  may  be  intro 
duced  and  eftabUihed  with  little  trouble  and  oppoii- 
tion. 

THE  principal  alterations,  neceflary  to  render  our, 
orthography  fufficiently  regular  and  eafy,  are  thefe  : 

I.  THE  omiiTiorf  of  all  fuperftuous  or  filent  letters; 
as  a  in  bread.  Thus  bread,  head,  give,  breaft,  built, 
meant,  realm,  friend,  would  be  fpelt,  bred,  bed,  giv,  breft, 
bilt,  ment,  relm,frend.  Would  this  alteration  produce  any 
inconvenience,  any  embarrafTinent  or  expenfe  ?  By  no 

means. 

*  THE  firft  by  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  fecretary  of  ftate  to  Queen  Eliza 
beth  :  Another  by  Dr.  Gill,  a  celebrated  matter  of  St.  Paul's  fchool  in 
London:  Another  by  Mr.  Charles  Butler,  who  went  Ib  far  as  to  print  his 
book,  in  his  propofed  orthography  :  Several  in  the  time  of  Charles  the 
firft  j  and  in  the  prefent  age,  Mr.  Elphinltyne  has  published  a  treatiis 
in  a  very  ridiculaus  orthography. 


APPENDIX.  395 

nieans.  On  the  other  hand,  it  would  leflen  the  trouble 
of  writing,  and  much  more,  of  learning  the  language  ; 
it  would  reduce  the  true  pronunciation  to  a  certainty  ; 
and  while  it  would  aflift  foreigners  and  our  own  chil 
dren  in  acquiring  the  language,  it  would  render  the 
pronunciation  uniform,  in  different  parts  of  the  coun 
try,  and  almoft  prevent  the  poflibility  of  changes. 

2.  A  SUBSTITUTION  of  a  chara&er  that  has  a  cer 
tain  definite  found,  for  one  that  is  more  vague  and 
indeterminate.     Thus  by  putting  ee  inftead  of  ea  or  u, 
the  words  mean,  near,fpeak,  grieve,  zeal,  would  become 
m-een,  ncer,fpcek,  greev,  zeel.     This  alteration  could  not 
occafion  a   moments  trouble  ;    at  the  fame  time  it 
would  prevent  a  doubt  refpe£ting  the  pronunciation  ; 
whereas   the  ea  and  ie  having  different  founds,   may 
give  a  learner  much  difficulty.     Thus  greef  mould  be 
iubftituted   for  grief  ;  kee  for  key  ;  beleev   for  believe  , 
lof  for  laugh  ;  dawter  for  daughter  ;  plow  for  plough  ; 
tuf  for  tough  ;   proov  for  prove  ;   blud  for  blood ;  and 
draft  for  draught.     In  this  manner  ch  in  Greek  deriva 
tives,  fhould  be  changed  into  k  ;  for  the  Englifh  ch  has 
a  foft  found,  as  in  cherijh  ;  but  k  always  a  hard  found. 
Therefore  character,  chorus,  cholic,  architecture,  (hould 
be  written  karatter,  korus,  kolic,  arkiteRure  ;  and  were 
they  thus  written,  no  perfon  could  miftake  their  true 
pronunciation. 

THUS  ch  in  French  derivatives  mould  be  changed 
into  jh  ;  machine,  cbaife,  chevalier,  (hould  be  written 
majheen,  fiaze,  Jkevaleer  ;  and  pique,  tour,  oblique,  fhould 
be  written  peek,  toor,  obkek. 

3.  A  TRIFLING  alteration  in  a  character,  or  the 
addition  of  a  point  would  diflinguim.  different  founds, 
without  the  fubftitution  of  a  new  character.     Thus  a 
very  fmall  ftroke  acrofs  th  would  diftiaguifli  its  two 
founds.     A  point  over  a  vowel,  in  this  manner,  a,  or 
c,  or  t,  might  anfwer  all  the  purpofes   of  different  let- 

And  for  the  dipthong  ow,  let  the  two  letters  be 

united 


APPENDIX, 

united  by  a  fmall  ftroke,  or  both  engraven  on  the  fama 
piece  of  metal,  with  the  left  hand  line  of  the  w  united 
to  the  o. 

THESE,  with  a  few  other  inconfiderable  alterations, 
would  anfwer  every  purpofe,  and  render  the  orthogra 
phy  fufficiently  correct  and  regular. 

THE  advantages  to  be  derived  from  thefe  alterations 
are  numerous,  great  and  permanent. 

1.  THE  fimplicity  of  the  orthography  would  facili 
tate  the  learning  of  the  language.     It  is  now  the  work 
of  years  for  children  to  learn  to  fpell ;  and  after  all, 
the  bufmefs  is  rarely  accomplimed.     A  few  men,  who* 
are  bred  to  fome  bufmefs  that  requires  conftant  exer- 
cife  in  writing,  finally  learn  to  fpell  rnoft  words  with 
out  hefitation  ;  but  mod  people  remain,  all  their  lives, 
imperfect  matters  of  fpeliing,  and  liable  to  make  mif- 
takes,  whenever  they  take  up  a  pen  to  write  a  fhort* 
fiote.     Nay,  many  people,  even  of  education  and  fam- 
ion,  never  attempt  to  write  a  letter,  without  frequently 
con fulting  a  dictionary. 

BUT  with  the  propofed  orthography,  a  child  would 
learn  to  fpell,  without  trouble,  in  a  very  fhort  time,  and 
the  orthography  being  very  regular,  he  would  ever  af 
terwards  find  it  difficult  to  make  a  miftake,  It  would, 
in  that  cafe,  be  as  cjif&cult  to  fpell  wrong^  as  it  is  now 
to  fpell  right. 

BESIDES  this  advantage,  foreigners  would  be  able 
to  acquire  the  pronunciation  of  Englilh,  which  is  now 
fo  difficult  and  embarraflmg,  that  they  are  either  whol 
ly  difcouraged  on  the  rirft  attempt,  or  obliged,  after 
many  years  labor,  to  reft  contented  with  an  imperfeft 
fcnowlege  of  the  fubje£t. 

2.  A  CORRECT  orthography  would  render  the  pro 
nunciation  of  the  language,  as  uniform  as  the  fpeliing; 

ir\ 


APPENDIX.  39? 

In  books.  A  general  uniformity  thro  the  United 
States,  would  be  the  event  of  fuch  a  reformation  as 
I  am  here  recommending.  All  perfons,  of  every  rank, 
would  fpeak  with  fome  degree  of  precifion  and  uni 
formity.*  Such  a  uniformity  in  thefe  ftates  is  very  de- 
fireable  ;  it  would  remove  prejudice,  and  conciliate  mu 
tual  affe&ion  and  refpeft. 

3.  SUCH  a  reform  would  diminifh  the  number  of 
letters  about  one  fixteenth  or  eighteenth.     This  would 
fave  a  page  in  eighteen  ;  and  a  faving  of  an  eighteenth 
in  the  expenfe'ef  books,  is  an  advantage  that  fhould 
not  be  overlooked. 

4.  BUT  a  capital  advantage  of  this  reform  in  thefe 
dates  would  be,  that  it  would  make  a  difference  be 
tween  the  Englifh  orthography  and  the  American. 
This  will  ftartle  thofe  who  have  not  attended  to  the 
fubjeft  ;  but  I  am  confident  that  fuch  an  event  is  an 
cbjecl  of  vaft  political  confequence.     For, 

THE  alteration,  however  fmall,  would  encourage  the 
publication  of  books  in  our  own  country.  It  would 
render  it,  in  fome  meafure,  neceffary  that  all  books 
fhould  be  printed  in  America.  The  Englifh  would 
never  copy  our  orthography  for  their  Own  ufe  ;  and 
confequently  the  fame  impreffions  of  books  would 
not  anfwer  for  both  countries.  The  inhabitants  of 
the  prefent  generation  would  read  the  English  im 
preffions  ;  but  pofterity,  being  taught  a  different 
fpelling,  would  prefer  the  American  orthography. 

BESIDES  this,  a  national  language  is  a  band  of  #/?-* 
iional  union.  Every  engine  fhould  be  employed  to  ren~ 
der  the  people  of  this  country  national ;  to  call  their 
attachments  home  to  their  own  country  ;  and  to  in- 
fpire  them  with  the  pride  of  national  charailer.  How-? 

ever 

*  I  ONCE  heard  Dr.  Franklin  remark,  "  that  thofe  people  fpeli  be&^ 
v.-ho  do  not  know  how  to  ipell  ;"  that  is,  they  fpell  as  their  ears  dictate, 
without  being  guided  by  rules,  aad  thus  fall  into  a  rtgular  orthography. 


398  APPENDIX; 

ever  they  may  boaft  of  Independence,  and  the  freedom 
of  their  government,  yet  their  opinions  are  not  fuffi- 
ciently  independent  ;  an  aftoniming  refpecl:  for  the 
arts  and  literature  of  their  parent  country,  and  a  blind 
imitation  of  its  manners,  are  ftill  prevalent  among  the 
Americans.  Thus  an  habitual  refpeft  for  another 
country,  deferved  indeed  and  once  laudable,  turns  their 
attention  from  their  own  interefts,  and  prevents  their 
receding  themfelves. 

OBJECTIONS. 

i.  "THIS  reform  of  the  Alphabet  would  oblige 
people  to  relearn  the  language,  or  it  could  not  be  in 
troduced." 

But  the  alterations  propofed  are  fo  few  and  fd  fim- 
ple,  that  an  hour's  attention  would,  enable  any  perfon 
to  read  the  new  orthography  with  facility  ;  and  a 
week's  practice  would  render  it  fo  familiar,  that  a  per 
fon  would  write  it  without  hefitation  or  miftake. 
Would  this  fmall  inconvenience  prevent  its  adoption  ? 
Would  not  the  numerous  national  and  literary  advan 
tages,  refulting  from  the  change,  induce  Americans  to 
make  fo  inconiiderable  a  facrifke  of  time  and  attention  ? 
I  am  perfuaded  they  would. 

BUT  it  would  not  be  neceflary  that  men  advanced 
beyond  the  middle  ftage  of  life,  ihould  be  at  the  pains 
to  learn  the  propofed  orthography.  They  would, 
without  inconvenience,  continue  to  ufe  the  prefent. 
They  would  read  the  new  orthography,  without  diffi 
culty  ;  but  they  would  write  in  the  old.  To  men  thus 
advanced,  and  even  to  the  prefent  generation  in  gener 
al,  if  tftey  mould  not  wifh  to  trouble  themfelves  with  a 
change,  the  reformation  would  be  almoft  a  matter  of 
indifference.  It  would  be  fufficient  that  children 
fhould  be  taught  the  new  orthography,  and  that  as  faft 
as  they  come  upon  the  ftage,  they  Ihould  be  furnifhed 

with 


APPENDIX.  399 

with  books  in  the  American  fpelling.  The  progrefs 
of  printing  would  be  proportioned  to  the  demand  for 
books  among  the  rifing  generation.  This  progreffive 
introduction  of  the  fcheme  would  be  extremely  eafy  ; 
children  would  learn  the  propofed  orthography  more 
eafily  than  they  would  the  old  ;  and  the  prefent  gener 
ation  would  not  be  troubled  with  the  change  ;  fo  that 
none  but  the  obninate  and  capricious  could  raife  ob 
jections  or  make  any  oppofition.  The  change  would 
be  fo  inconliderable,  and  made  on  fuch  fimple  princi 
ples,  that  a  column  in  each  newfpaper,  printed  in  the 
new  fpelling,  would  in  fix  months,  familiarize  moft 
people  to  the  change,  fhow  the  advantages  of  it,  and 
imperceptibly  remove  their  objections.  The  only  fteps 
neceffary  to  enfure  fuccefs  in  the  attempt  to  introduce 
this  reform,  would  be,  a  refolution  of  Congrefs,  order 
ing  all  their  acts  to  be  engrofled  in  the  new  orthogra 
phy,  and  recommending  the  plan  to  the  feveral  univer- 
fities  in  America  ;  and  alfo  a  refolution  of  the  univerfi- 
ties  to  encourage  and  fupport  it.  The  printers  would 
begin  the  reformation  by  publifliing  fhort  paragraphs 
and  fmall  tracts  in  the  new  orthography  ;  fchool  books 
would  firft  be  published  in  the  fame  ;  curiofity  would 
excite  attention  to  it,  and  men  would  be  gradually  rec 
onciled  to  the  plan. 

2.  "THIS  change  would  render  our  prefent  books 
ufelefs." 

THIS  objection  is,  in  fome  meafure,  anfwered  under 
the  foregoing  head.  The  truth  is,t  it  would  not  have 
this  effect.  The  difference  of  orthography  would  not 
render  books  printed  in  one,  illegible  to  perfons  ac 
quainted  only  with  the  other.  The  difference  would 
net  be  fo  great  as  between  the  orthography  of  Chaucer, 
and  of  the  prefent  age  ;  yet  Chaucer's  works  are  ftili 
read  with  eafe. 

3.  "THIS  reformation  would  injure  the  language 
by  obfcuring  etymology." 

THIS 


4co  APPENDIX. 

THIS  objection  is  unfounded;  In  general,  it  is  riot 
true  that  the  change  would  obfcure  etymology  j  in  a 
few  inftances,  it  might  ;  but  it  would  rather  retfore  the 
etymology  of  many  words  ;  and  if  it  were  true  that 
the  change  would  obfcure  it,  this  would  be  no  objec 
tion  to  the  reformation. 
• 

IT  will  perhaps  furprize  my  readers  to  be  told  that, 
>n  many  particular  words,  the  modern  fpelling  is  lefs 
correct  than  the  ancient.  Yet  this  is  a  truth  that  re 
flects  dishonor  on  our  modern  refiners  of  the  language. 
Chaucer,  four  hundred  years  ago,  wrote  bilder  for  build 
er  ;  ckdly  for  deadly  ;  erneft  for  earneft  ;  erly  for  early  ; 
Ireji  for  breaft ;  bed  for  bead  j  and  certainly  his  fpelling 
was  the  moft  agreeable  to  the  pronunciation.*  Sidney 
wrote  bity  examin^  futable^  with  perfect  propriety.  Dr. 
Middleton  wrote  explane*  genuin^  revile,  which  is  the 
moft  eafy  and  correct  orthography  of  fuch  words  ;  and 
alfo  lufter,  theater^  for  luftre^  theatre.  In  thefe  and 
many  other  instances,  the  modern  fpelling  is  a  corrup* 
tion  ;  fo  that  allowing  many  improvements  to  have 
been  made  in  orthography,  within  a  century  or  two, 
we  muft  acknowlege  alfo  that  many  corruptions  have 
been  introduced. 

IN  anfwer  to  the  objection,  that  a  change  of  orthog 
raphy  would  obfcure  etymology,  I  would  remark,  that 
the  etymology  of  moft  words  is  already  loft,  even  ta 
the  learned  ;  and  to  the  unlearned,  etymology  is  never 
known.  Where  is  the  man  that  can  trace  back  our 
Englifh  words  to  the  elementary  radicals  ?  In  a  few  in- 
ftances,  the  ftudent  has  been  able  to  reach  the  primi 
tive  roots  of  words  ;  but  I  prefurrte  the  radicals  of  one 
tenth  of  the  words  in  our  language,  have  never  yet 
been  difcovered,  even  by  Junius,  Skinner,  or  any  other 
etymologift.  Any  man  may  look  into  Johnfon  or  Am, 
and  find  that  flejb  is  derived  from  the  Saxon  floce ;  child 
from  did  j  flood  from  fad  ;  lad  from  leode  ;  and  loaf 

from 

r    *  IN  Chaucer's  life,  prefixed  to  the  edition  of  his  works  1602,  I  fini 
i't  and  prove  fpelt  aimoft  correctly,  moove  and  froove. 


APPENDIX.  401 

from  laf  or  blaf.  But  this  difcovery  will  anfwer  no 
other  purpofe,  than  to  fhow,  that  within  a  few  hundred 
years,  the  fuelling  of  fome  words  has  been  a  little  chang 
ed  :  We  mould  ftill  be  at  a  vaft  diftance  from  the 
primitive  roots. 

IN  many  inftances  indeed  etymology  will  affift  the 
learned  in  underftahding  the  compofition  and  true  fenfe 
of  a  word  j  and  it  throws  much  light  upon  the  progrefs 
of  language.  But  the  true  fenfe  of  a  complex  term  is 
not  always,  nor  generally^  to  be  learnt  from  the  fenfe  of 
the  primitives  or  elementary  words.  The  current 
meaning  of  a  word  depends  on  its  ufe  in  a  nation.  This 
true  fenfe  is  to  be  obtained  by  attending  to  good  au 
thors,  to  dictionaries  and  to  practice,  rather  than  to  de 
rivation.  The  former  mu/l  be  right  -y  the  latter  may 
lead  us  into  err&r. 

BUT  to  prove  of  how  little  confequence  a  knowlege 
of  etymology  is  to  mod  people,  let  me  mention  a  few 
words.  The  word  fmcere  is  derived  from  the  Latin, 
fine  cera'y  without  wax  ;  and  thus  it  came  to  denote 
purity  of  mind.  I  am  confident  that  not  a  man  in  a 
thoufand  ever  fufpe&ed  this  to  be  the  origin  of  the 
word  ;  yet  all  men,  that  have  any  knowlege  of  our  lan 
guage,  ufe  the  word  in  its  true  fenfe,  and  understand  its 
cuftomary  meaning,  as  well  as  Junius  did,  or  any  other 
ctymologift. 

TEAov  yes  is  derived  from  the  imperative  of  a  verb, 
avoir  to  have,  as  the  word  is  now  fpelt.  It  fignifies 
therefore  have,  or  poffefs^  or  take  what  you  afk.  But 
does  this  explication  affift  us  in  ufmg  the  word  ?  And 
does  not  every  countryman  who  labors  in  the  field,  un- 
derftand  and  ufe  the  word  with  as  much  precifion  as 
the  profoundeft  philofophers  ? 

THE  word  temper  is  derived  from. an  old  root,  tern, 
which  fignified  water.     It  was  borrowed  from  the  acl: 
of  cwlin&  or  moderating  heat.     Hence  the  meaning  of 
B  b  temperate^ 


4-i         APPENDIX, 

•temper ate.,  temperance,  and  all  the  ramifications  of  the  o~v 
riginal  flock.  But  does  this  help  us  to  the  moderri 
current  fenfe  of  thefe  words  ?  By  no  means.  It  leads 
tis  to  understand  the  formation  of  languages,  and  iri 
Vvhat  manner  an  idea  of  a  vifible  action  gives  rife  to  a 
correfpondent  abftract  idea  ;  or  rather,  how  a  word, 
from  a  literal  and  direct  fenfe,  may  be  applied  to  ex- 
prefs  a  variety  of  figurative  and  collateral  ideas.  Yet 
the  cuftcmary  fefife  of  the  word  is  known  by  practice, 
and  as  well  u'nderftood  by  an  illiterate  man  of  tolerable 
capacity,  as  by  men  of  fcience. 

TH  E  word  always  is  compounded  of  all  and  ways  ; 
it  had  originally  no  reference  to  time  ;  and  the  ety 
mology  or  composition  of  the  word  would  only  lead 
us  into  error.  The  true  meaning  of.  words  is  that 
which  a  nation  in  general  annex  to  them.  Etymology 
therefore  is  of  no  ufe  but  to  the  learned  ;  and  for  them 
it  will  ftill  be  preferved,  fo  far  as  it  is  now  underftood, 
in  dictionaries  and  other  books  that  treat  of  this  partic 
ular  fubje£K 

4.  "  TrtE  diflin&ion  between  words  of  different 
meanings  and  fimilar  found  would  be  deftroyed." 

"  THAT  diftinftion,"  to  arifwer  in  the  words  of  the 
great  Franklin,  "  is  already  deftroyed  in  pronunciation." 
Does  not  every  man  pronounce  all  and  awl  precifely 
alike?  And  does  the  famenefs  of  found  ever  lead  a 
hearer  into  a  milhke  ?  Does  not  the  conftmftion  ren 
der  the  diilinction  eafy  and  intelligible,  the  moment 
the  words  of  the  fentence  are  heard  ?  Is  the  word 
hiew  ever  miflaken  for  new,  even  in  the  rapidity  of 
pronouncing  an  animated  oration  ?  Was  peace  ever 
in  i flak-en  for  piece  ;  pray  for  prey  ;  flour  for  flower  ? 
Never,  I  prefuma^  is  this  fimilarity  of  found  the  oc- 
caiion  of  miftakes. 

IF  therefore  an  identity  of 'found,  even  in  rapid  fpeak- 
produces  no  inconvenience,  how  much  left  wouM 

an 


APPENDIX,  403 

^n  identity  of  /pelting)  when  the  eye  would  have  leifure 
to  furvey  the  conftru&ion  ?  But  experience,  the  crite 
rion  of  truth,  which  has  removed  the  objection  in  the  nrft 
cafe,  will  alfo  aflift  us  in  forming  our  opinion  in  the  laft. 

THERE  are  many  words  in  our  language  which^ 
with  the  fame  orthography,  have  two  or  more  dijlintt 
meanings.  The  word  wind,  whether  it  iignifies  to  mave 
round)  or  air  in  motion^  has  the  fame  fpelh  'ng  ;  it  exhib 
its  no  diftinclioi*  to  the  eye  of  a  iilent  reader  ;  and  yet 
jts  meaning  is  never  miftaken.  The  connrudioii 
fhows  at  fight  in  which  fenfe  the  word  is  to  be  under- 
ftood.  Hail  is  ufed  as  an  expreffion  of  joy,  or  to  fig- 
nify  frozen  drops  of  water,  falling  from  the  clouds. 
Rear  is  to  raife  up,  or  it  figniiies  the  hinder  part  of  an 
army.  Lot  lignifies  fortune  or  deftiny  -9  a  plat  of 
ground  ;  or  a  certain  proportion  or  ihare  ;  and  yet 
does  this  diverfity,  this  contrariety  of  meanings  ever 
pccafion  the  leaft  difficulty  in  the  ordinary  language  of 
books  ?  It  cannot  be  maintained.  This  diverfity  is 
Found  in  all  languages  ;*  and  altho  it  may  be  confiderec! 
as  a  defect,  and  occallon  fome  trouble  for  foreign  learn 
ers,  yet  to  natives  it  produces  no  fenfibte  inconve 
nience. 

,  5.  "  IT  is  idle  to  conform  the  orthography  of  words 
to  the  pronunciation,  becaufe  the  latter  is  continually 
changing." 

.  THIS  is  one  of  Dr.  Johnfon's  objections,  and  it  is 
very  unworthy  of  his  judgement.  So  far  is  this  circum- 
ftance  from  being  a  real  objection,  that  it  is  alone  a  fuf- 
ficient  reafon  for  the  change  of  fpelling.  ,\  On  his  prin- 
dple  of  fixing  the  orthography^  while  the  pronunciation  is 
changing^  any  fpoken  language  muf>,  in  time,  lofe  all  re 
lation  to  the  written  language  ;  that  is,  the  founds  of 
words  would  have  no  affinity  with  the  letters  that  com- 

pofe 

the  Roman  language  7/&r  had  four  or  five  different  meanings  ;  it 


^ 
fignified  free,  the  inward  bark  of  a  tree,  a  iotkt  Ibmctiracs  an  tti 

?JlO 


4p4  APPENDIX. 

pofe  them.    Jivfome  infhnces,  this  Is  now  the  cafe ;  anct 
no  mortal  would  fufpeffc  from  the  fpeliing,  that  neigh- 
Icur,  wrought^  are  pronounced  nabur^  rawt.     On  this 
principle,  Dr.  Johnlbn  ought  to  have  gone  back  fome 
centuries,  and  given  us,  in  his  didlionary,  the  primitive 
Saxon   orthography,  wol  for  will ;  ydilneffe  for  idienefs  ; 
lycn  fcr  eyes  ;  cche  for  each,  &c.     Nay,  he  fhould  have 
gone  as  far  as  poffible  into  antiquity,  and,  regardlefs  of 
the  changes  of  pronunciation,  given  us  the  primitive 
radical  language  in  its  purity.     Happily  for  the  lan 
guage,  that  doctrine  did  not  prevail  till  his  time  ;  the 
fpeliing  of  words  changed  with  the  pronunciation  ;  to 
thefe  changes  we  are  indebted  for  numberlefs  improve 
ments;  and  it  is  hoped  that  the  progrefs  of  them,  in  con 
formity  with  the  national  practice  of  fpeaking,  will  not 
be  obstructed  by  the  erroneous  opinion,  even  of  Dr. 
Johnfon.     How  much  more  rational  is  the  opinion  of 
Dr.  Franklin,  who  fays,  "  the  orthography  of  our  lan 
guage  began  to  be  fixed  too  foon."     If  the  pronuncia 
tion  muft  vary,  from  age  to  age,  (and  fome  trifling 
changes  of  language  will' always  be  talcing  place)  com 
mon  Tcrvfe  would  dictate  a  correfpondent  change  of 
fpeliing.    Admit  Johnfon's  principles ;  take  his  pedant* 
ic  orthography  for  the  ffondard  ;  let  it  be  clofely  ad 
hered  to  in  future  ;  sad  the  flow  changes  in  the  pro 
nunciation  of  our  national  tongue,  will  in  time  make 
as  great  a  difference  between  our  written  zndfpohn  lan 
guage,  as  there  is  between  the  pronunciation  of  the 
prefent  Englifh  and  German.     The  fpeliing  will  be  no 
irore  a  guide  to  the  pronunciation,  tharr  the  orthogra 
phy  of  the  German  or  Greek.     This  event  is  actually 
taking  place,  in  confequence  of  the  ftupid  opinion,  ad 
vanced  by  Johnfon  and  other  writers,  and -generally 
embraced  by  the  nation. 

ALL  thefe  objections  appear  to  me  of  very  mcorificl- 
errtbie  weight,  when  oppofed  to  tti^great,  fubftantial  and 
permanent  advantages  to  be  derived  from  a  regulaf 
national  orthography. 


APPENDIX, 

SENSIBLE  I  am  how  much  eafier  it  is  to  propofe  im 
provements,  than  to  Introduce  them.  Every  thing  new 
Sarts  the  idea  of  difficulty  ;  and  yet  it  is  often  mere  nov 
elty  that  excites  the  appearance ;  for  on  a  flight  exam 
ination  of  the  propofal,  the  difficulty  vanishes.  When 
we  firmly  believe  a  fcheme  to  be  practicable,  the  -work 
is  half  accomplifhed.  We  are  more  frequently  deter 
red  by  fear  from  making  an  attack,  than  repulfed  in 
the  encounter. 

HABIT  alfo  is  oppofed  to  changes  ;  for  it  renders  evezi 
our  errors  dear  to  us.  Having  furmcunted  all  difficul 
ties  in  childhood,  we  forget  the  labor,  the  fatigue,  and 
the  perplexity  we  fuffered  in  the  attempt,  and  imagin 
the  progrefs  of  our  ftudies  to  have  been  fmooth  and  ea~ 
fy.*  What  feems  intrinfically  right,  is  fo  merely  thro 
habit. 

INDOLENCE  is  another  obftacle  to  improvements. 
The  moft  arduous  talk  a  reformer  has  to  execute,  is  to 
make  people  think  ;  to  rouie  them  from  that  lethargy, 
which,  like  the  mantle  of  ileep,  covers  them  in  repofe 
and  contentment. 

BUT  America  is  in  a  dtuation  the  mod  favorable  for 
great  reformations  ;  and  the  prefent  time  is,  in  a  fjngu- 
lar  degree,  aufpicious.  The  minds  of  men  in  this 
country  have  been  awakened.  New  fcenes  have  been, 
for  many  years,  prefenting  new  occafions  for  exertion  ; 
unexpected  diftreffes  have  called  forth  the  powers  cf 
invention  ;  and  the  application  of  new  expedients  lias 
demanded  every  poffible  exercife  of  wifdom  and  talents. 
Attention  is  roufed  j  the  mind  expanded  ;  and  the  in 
tellectual 

*  THUS  moft  people  fuppofe  the  prefent  mode  cf  fpellin£  to  be  real!/ 
the  eaficft  and  befl.     This  opinion  is  derived  from  habit  ;  the  new  inoi,;: 
of  fpeJling  propoted  would  fave  three  fourths  of  the  labor  now  bcltov."d  ;  i 
learning  to  write  ouv  language.     A  child  would  learn  to  fpell  is  well  in 
one_year,  as  he  can  now  in  four.     This  is  not  a  fuppofition — it  is  ;.ii  a;  ^ 
iertion  capable  of  proof  j  and  yet  people,  never  knowing,  or  havi" 
got  the  labor  of  learning,  Tuppofe   the   prefent  mode  to  i>c  tin;  earn* IT. 
NO  perfon,  but  one  who  has  taught  children,  has  any  idea  of'  the  di.Ti 
C.q!ty  of  learning  to  fpell  and  pronounce  our  language  in  its  pie&nt 


406  APPEND!    X; 

telleclual  faculties  invigorated.  Here  men  are  prepare^ 
to  receive  improvements,  which  would  be  rejected  by 
nations,  whofe  habits  have  not  been  fhaken  by  fimilar 
events. 


the  time,  and  this  the  country,  in  which  we 
may  expect  fuccefs,  in  attempting  changes  favorable  to 
language,  fcience  and  government.  Delay,  in  the  plan 
here  propofed,  may  be  fatal  ;  under  a  tranquil  general 
government,  the  minds  of  men  may  again  fmk  into  in 
dolence';  a  national  acquiefcence  in  error  will  follow; 
and  pofterity  be  doomed  to  rtruggle  with  difficulties, 
which  time  and  accident  will  perpetually  multiply. 

LET  us  then  feize  the  prefent  moment,  and  eftablifh 
a  national  language^  as  well  as  a  national  government. 
Let  us  remember  that  there  is  a  certain  refpect  due  to 
the  opinions  of  other  nations.  As  an  independent 
people,  our  reputation  abroad  demands  that,  in  all 
things,  we  (liquid  fce  federal  ;  be  national  ;  for  if  we 
do  not  refpect  our/elves^  we  may  be  allured  that  other 
nations  will  not  refpect  us.  In  fhort,  let  it  be  impreffed 
upon  the  mind  of  every  American,  that  to  neglect  the 
means  of  commanding  refpect  abroad,  is  treafon  againft 
the  character,  and  dignity  of  a  brave  independent 
people. 

To  excite  the  more  attention  tp  this  fubject,  I  will 
here  fubjoin  what  Dr.  Franklin  has  done  and  written 
to  effect  a  reform  in  our  mode  of  fpelling.  This  fag? 
philofopher  has  fuffered  nothing  ufeful  to  efcape  his 
notice.  He  very  early  difcovered  the  difficulties  that 
attend  the  learning  of  our  language  ;  and  with  his  u- 
fual  ingenuity,  invented  a  plan  to  obviate  them.  If  any 
objection  can  be  made  to  his  fcheme,*  it  is  the  fubftitu- 
tion  of  new  characters,  for  M,  Jhy  ng,  &c.  whereas  a 
fmall  ftroke,  connecting  the  letters,  would  anfwer  all 
the  purpofes  of  new  characters  ;  as  thefe  combination's 
\vould  thus  become  fmgle  letters,  with  precife  definite 
founds  and  fuitable  names. 

A 

*  3eE  his  Miscellaneous  Works,  p.  470.  Ed.Lond.  1779* 


APPENDIX. 

A  SPECIMEN  of  the  Doctor's  fpelling  cannot  be  here 
given,  as  I  have  not  the  proper  types  ;*  but  the  argu 
ments  in  favor  of  a  reformed  mode  of  fpelling  iliali  be 
given  in  his  own  words. 

COPY  of  a  Letter  from  Mifs  S ,  to  Dr.  FRANKLIN", 

who  bad  fent  her  his  Scheme  of  a  Reformed  Ahbabit. 
Dated,  Kenfmgton  (England)  Sept.  26,  1768, 

DEAR    SIR, 

I  .HAVE  tranfcribed  your  alphabet,  &c.  which  I 
think  might  be  ©f  fervice  to  thofe  who  wifh  to  acquire 
an  accurate  pronunciation,  if  that  could  be  fixed  ;  but 
I  fee  many  inconveniences,  as  well  as  difficulties,  that 
would  attend  the  bringing  your  letters  and  orthography 
into  common  ufe.  All  our  etymologies  would  be  loit  ; 
confequently  we  could  not  afcertain  the  meaning  or* 
many  words  ;  the  diftindtion  too  between  words  of  dif 
ferent  meaning  and  fimilar.  found  would  be  ufelefs,f  un~ 
lefs  we  living  writers  publiih  new  editions.  In  (horr,  I 
believe  we  muft  let  people  fpell  on  in  their  old  way,  and 

(as  we  find  it  eaiieft)  do  the  fame  ourfelves. With 

eafe  and  with  fmcerity  I  can,  in  the  old  way,  fubfcribjs 
myfelf, 

Dear  Sir, 

Your  faithful  and  affectionate  Servant, 

M,  S. 
J)r,  Franklin* 

Dr. 

*  THIS  indefatigable  gentleman,  amid  ft  all  his  other  employments, 
public  and  private,  has  compiled  a  Dictionary  on  his  fcheme  of  a  Re 
form,  and  procured  types  to  be  caft  for  printing  it.  He  thinks  hin;ie!r' 
too  old  to  purfue  the  plan  j  but  has  honored  me  with  the  offer  of  the 
inanufcript  and  types,  and  exprefled  a  ftrong  deiire  that  1  mould  uu  -k,-- 
take  the  tafk.  Whether  this  project,  fo  deeply  interefting  to  this  Coun 
try,  will  ever  be  effected  j  or  whether  it  will  be  defealed  by  indolence  and 
prejudice,  remains  for  my  countrymen  to  determine. 

•)•  THIS  lady  overlooked  the  other  fide  of  the  queftion  5  viz.  that  by  a 
reform  of  the  fpelling,  words  now  fpelt  alike  and  pronounce 
would  be  diftinguifhed  by  their  letters  ^  for  the  nouns  al-^je  anJ  uc  woui-i 
be  dillinguifhed  from  the  verbs,  which  would  be 
fo  in  many  inftances.    See  the  aniwer  below. 


A    P    B E    N    D    I    X, 

Dr>  FRANKLIN'S  Anfwer  to  Mifs  S — «-. 

i 

DEAR  MADAM, 

THE  obje£lion  you  make  to  re&ifying  our  alphabet, 
<l  that  it  will  be  attended  with  inconveniences  and  dif 
ficulties/'  is  a  very  natural  one  ;  for  it  always  occurs 
when  any  reformation  is  propofed,  whether  in  religion, 
government,  laws,  and  even  down  as  low  as  roads  and 
wheel  carnages.  The  true  queftion  then  is  not,  whether 
there  will  be  no  difficulties  or  inconveniences  ;  but 
whether  the  difficulties  may  not  be  furmounted  ;  2nd 
whether  the  conveniences  will  not,  on  the  whole,  be 
greater  than  the  inconveniences.  Ip  this  cafe,  the  diffi 
culties  are  only  in  the  beginning  of  the  practice  ;  when, 
they  are  once  overcome,  the  advantages  are  lafting.  To 
either  you  or  me,  who  fpell  well  in  the  prefent  mode,  lim- 
agin  me  difficulty  of  changing  that  mode  for  the  new, 
is  not  fo'  great,  but  that  We  might  perfectly  get  over  it  in 
a  week's  writing.  As  to  thofe  who  do  not  fpell  well,  if 
the  two  difficulties  are  compared,  viz.  that  of  teaching 
them  true  fpelling  in  the  prefent  mode,  and  that  of  teach 
ing  them  the  new  alphabet  and  the  new  fpelling  accord 
ing  to  it,  I  am  confident  that  the  latter  would  be  by  far 
the  leaft.  They  naturally  fall  into  the  new  method  al 
ready,  as  much  as  the  imperfection  of  their  alphabet 
will  admit  of ;  their  prefent  bad  fpelling  is  only  bad, 
becaufe  contrary  to  the  pfefent  bad  rules  ;  under  the 
new  rules  it  would  be  good'.*  The  difficulty  of  learn 
ing  to  fpell  well  in  the  old  way  is  fo  great,  that  few  at 
tain  it;  thoufands  and  thoufands  writing  on  to  ofd  age? 
withoutr'ever  being  able  to  acquire  it.  It  is  befides,  a 
difficulty  continually  increasing  ;f  as  the  found  gradu 
ally  varies  more  and  more  from  the  fpelling  ;  and  to 
foreigners  it  makes  the  learning  to  pronounce  our  lan 
guage,  as  written  in  our  books,  alm'oft  impoifiblc. 

Now 

*  THIS  remark  of  the  Doftor  is  very  juft  and  obvious.  A  country 
man  writes  rffor  or  alur  for  acre  ;  yet  ihe  countryman  is  rlgbt\  as  thr. 
word  cugkt  to  be  fpeit  j  and  we  laugh  at  him  only  becauie  we  are  ac- 
cuftomtd  to  be  ivrcngu 

•f  THIS  is  a  fa£l  cf  vaft  confcqucn.ee. 


APPENDIX 

Now  as  to  the  inconveniences  you  mention  :  The 
firft  is,  "  that  all  our  etymologies  Would  be  loft  ;  con- 
jfeouently  we  could  not  ascertain  the  meaning  of  many 
words."  Etymologies  are  at  prefent  very  uncertain  ; 
but  fuch  as  they  are,  the  oM  books  ftill  preferve  them, 
and  etymologifts  would  there  find  them.  Words  in 
the  courfe  of  time,  change  their  meaning,  as  well  a$ 
their  fpelling  and  pronunciation  ;  and  we  do  not  look 
to  etymotogies  for  their  prefent  meanings.  If  1  mould 
call  a  man  a  knave  and  a  villain^  he  would  hardly  be 
fatisfied  with  my  telling  him,  that  one  of  the  words  o- 
riginally  fignified  a  lad  or  Jervant^  and  the  other  an  un 
der  plowman^  or  the  inhabitant  of  a  village.  It  is  from 
prefent  ufage  only,  the  meaning  of  words  is  to  be  dc- 
fermined. 

YOUR  fecond  inconvenience  is,  "  the  cfiftincYion  be 
tween  words  of  different  meaning  and  fimilar  found 
would  be  deftroyed."  That  difh'n&ion  is  already  de 
ftroyed  in  pronouncing  them  ;  and  we  rely  on  the  fenfe 
alone  of  the  fenteiice  to  afcertain  which  of  the  feveral 
words,  fimilar  in  found,  we  intend.  If  this  is  fufHcienl: 
in  the  rapidity  of  difcourfe,  it  will  be  much  more  fo  in 
written  fentences,  which  may  be  read  leifurely,  and  at 
tended  to  more  particularly  in  Cafe  of  difficulty,  than 
we  can  attend  to  a  paft  fentencc,  while  the  fpeaker  is 
hurrying  us  along  with  new  ones. 

YOUR  third  inconvenience  is,  "that  all  the  books 
already  written  would  be  ufelefs."  This  inconveni 
ence  would  only  come  on  gradually  in  a  courfe  of  ages. 
I  and  you  and  other  now  living  readers  would  hardly 
forget  the  ufe  of  them.  People  Would  long  learn  to 
read  the  old  writing,  tho  they  pra&ifed  the  new.  And 
the  inconvenience  is  not  greater  than  what  has  actually 
happened  in  a  fimilar  cafe  in  Italy.  Formerly  its  in 
habitants  all  fpoke  and  wrote  Latin  ;  as  the  language 
changed,  the  fpelling  followed  it.  It  is  true  that  at 
prefent,  a  mere  unlearned  Italian  cannot  read  the  Lat 
in  books,  tho  they  are  ftill  read  and  underftood  by  many. 


4ro  APPEND!    X, 

But  if  the  fpelling  had  never  been  changed,  he  would 
now  have  found  it  much  more  difficult  to  read  and 
write  his  own  language  ;*  for  written  words  would 
have  had  no  relation  to  founds  ;  they  would  only  have 
flood  for  things  ;  fo  that  if  he  would  exprefs  in  writ 
ing  the  idea  he  has  when  he  founds  the  word  Fefcovo, 

he  muft  ufe  the  letters  Epifcopus.-\ 

• 

IN  fhort,  whatever  the  difficulties  and  inconvenien 
ces  now  are,  they  will  be  more  eafily  furmounted  now, 
than  hereafter ;  and  fome  time  or  other  it  muft  be  done, 
or  our  writing  will  become  the  fame  with  the  Chinefe, 
as  to  the  difficulty  of  learning  and  ufing  it.  And  it 
would  already  have  been  fuch,  if  we  had  continued 
the  Saxon  fpelling  and  writing  ufed  by  our  forefathers, 

I  am3  my  dear  friend, 

Your's  affectionately, 

B.  FRANKLIN, 

London,  Craven  Street^  Sept.  28,  1768. 

*  THAT  Is,  if  the  language  had  retained  the  old  Roman  fpelling,  and 
jbcen  pronounced  as  the  modern  Italian.  This  is  a  fair  ftdte  of  fids,  and 
a  complete  anfwer  to  all  objections  to  a  reform  of  fpelling. 

•f-  IN  the  fame  ridiculous  manner,  as  tue  write,  rough,  Jlill,  neighbor^ 
wrong,  tongue,  true,  rhetoric,  &c.  and  yet  pronounce  the  words,  ruf,  Jiil, 
ftxtur  ron  tun  tru  retcric* 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWE1 
LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


LIBRARY  USE 


REC'D 


LD  2lA-50m-8/57 
(C8481slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


624359 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


